Mary Toulouse teaches French at Lafayette College. But on Nov. 30, as president of Bethlehem’s Mount Airy Neighborhood Association (MANA), she gave a history lesson to the city’s Zoning Hearing Board. It concerned the Armory, a National Historic Landmark located at 345 Second Ave. Peron Development is seeking a special exception and 11 dimensional variances for a four-story, 70 unit apartment complex at the 2.57 acre site. There will be 50 one-bedroom and 20 two-bedroom units. But the on-site parking (99 spots) is below the 123 spots required under the city’s recently enacted zoning ordinance. Moreover, no plan is in in place for the Armory itself.

Unable to reach a decision that day, a three-member panel of the city’s Zoning Hearing Board planned to try again Dec. 12. These members are Bill Fitzpatrick, Jim Schantz and Attorney Michael Santanasto. Though deliberations are private, the decision itself must be announced and voted on publicly. Erich Schock is the board’s solicitor, and has been ruling on the numerous objections made over two nights of testimony.

At its Aug. 16 meeting, city council voted 6-0, with one abstention, to authorize the Bethlehem Redevelopment Authority to sell the property to Peron Development. At that time, Executive Director Tony Hanna said it was the best of 10 proposals considered because it included more green space and on-site parking than the other proposals. He called it a “good project for Bethlehem and the neighborhood.” Council President Willie Reynolds said he liked the idea of building more housing close to the downtown business corridor. But several members of council made clear that, while they were endorsing the concept, they were leaving the actual plan to the regulatory bodies entrusted with ensuring that the city’s land development laws are followed.

As always, the devil is in the details.

Bryan Callahan recused himself from voting on this sale because his brother is employed by Peron and has actively lobbied for this project.

As Callahan’s recusal makes clear, this proposal is backed by some city heavyweights. Peron’s principal is Michael Perrucci, an attorney with prominent law firm Florio Perrucci. In addition to Perrucci himself, members of this firm include a former New Jersey governor, former President Judge of Northampton County and the son of Bethlehem’s current mayor. It also employs the city’s former mayor, John Callahan, as a public relations chair. Firm lawyer Seth Tipton is representing Peron.

In addition to the imprimatur of Bethlehem’s Redevelopment Authority as the best of 10 proposals, a specific plan has also received a thumbs up from the city’s Planning Commission.

Just in case all this clout fell short, Planning Director Darlene Heller testified in support of this apartment complex, summarily dismissing complaints by neighbors.

“I underestimated the forces arrayed against my client and the community,” said Bethlehem Attorney Michael Shay, representing MANA. His firm includes no former governors, judges or mayors. Only lawyers.

As a lawyer, Shay seemed particularly irked that the city’s planning director would essentially act as a witness for the zoning applicant. “I believe it is improper,” he said, as she supervises the zoning officer who denied the application from which an appeal was filed. She has testified in the past on behalf of developers, most notably Peron.

“You are the gatekeepers,” Shay reminded Zoning Hearing Board members.

Against all this clout were about 35 people who live in West Bethlehem. MANA’s Toulouse was the sole witness called by Bethlehem Attorney Michael Shay. Of 13 people who testified, 11 opposed the Armory plans. Tamara Nisic said, “No one who is not getting paid by the developer has been here to say, “This is a great idea.’”

Engineer Laura Eberly testified on behalf of Peron in support of the project. She said only 99 parking spots could be placed on site instead of the required 123 because physical constraints caused by a steep slope as well as the adaptive reuse. She insisted several times that Peron is only seeking the minimum amount of relief needed for this project.

But neighbor Jefferson Pooley and attorney Shay disputed this. By simply reducing the number of apartments to 54 instead of 70, there would be no need at all for a parking variance, they said. Eberly was never asked to come up with a plan that minimized the variances, she admitted.

Another point made by Shay is that adaptive reuse is permitted for a primary residential building, but not other structures. “How can you have an adaptive reuse of a building when you ignore the building that necessitates the reuse?” he asked. The Peron plan makes no adaptive reuse of the Armory itself, which will continue to sit vacant. Westside resident Bill Scheirer would later complain that this is “demolition by neglect.”

Attorney Tipton and Heller countered Shay by arguing that the Armory is connected to two other buildings and this can be considered one building.

An attempt to create additional parking spots with 90-degree parking in Second Avenue was criticized by several residents as unsafe.

A proposal to stripe the ramp leading to the Hill-to-Hill bridge to provide even more parking was slammed because no one is sure the ramp will even be there once PennDOT starts work on that bridge.

Rauch Street resident Scott Arnold was concerned about a parking lot that ends four feet from his house: He has children. John San Filipo said he will open his front door to a loading dock. Darlene Heller would later testify that there should be tighter density in the urban core, but she authored a zoning ordinance that would make this illegal without a variance.

In an atmosphere that smacked of classism, Professor Toulouse testified to the very real classism that existed in 1930. That’s when Bethlehem Steel President Eugene Grace built the Armory. “It served as a protection for the homes of the top executives from the angry workers,” she said, adding the Armory is in front of the home of West Bethlehem’s burgher, and along the same route upon which a wagon carried the Liberty Bell to hide it from the British. She called the Armory an “integral part of the Westside’s path through history” that links the burial grounds of the Revolutionary soldiers, one street east on First Avenue, to the Mount Airy Historic District and steel executive mansions that extend from Eighth to 16th avenues.

Toulouse testified that she sent several emails and written requests to meet with Peron to develop the Armory in a historically sensitive way, but received no response.

Subsequent investigation revealed there was one meeting between the developer and concerned residents, but Callahan vetoed a second meeting.

Toulouse castigated developers for renaming this complex the Peron Armory.

“This is the Floyd Simmons Armory, named for Floyd Simmons by comrades who survived him. Floyd Simmons was the first Bethlehem soldier to be killed in World War I. ... It would be a tremendous dishonor for the City of Bethlehem, a city that prides itself on its history, if this board, in the year 2017, 100 years after the entrance of the U.S. into World War I, votes to allow this proposal to pass and put this national historic landmark in danger of the wrecking ball.”

Residents opposed to this plan all agreed they would like to see it developed and have no problem with residential use, but on a smaller scale in conformity with the community. MANA member Christine Roysdon did a survey of the perimeter around the Armory and said that at 6 am, both blocks had 29 cars parked overnight. She complained that unleashing an additional 24 cars into the neighborhood would have negative consequences.

An angry Amy Zanelli, recently elected to Lehigh County’s Board of Commissioners, complained that West Bethlehem has been “overlooked and ignored.” She said seeking 11 zoning variances shows a “blatant disregard of our community.” She inveighed against the lack of a plan for the Armory as “preposterous.”

Contacted after the hearing, Hanna said the Armory’s name will always be the Floyd Simmons Armory. Peron Armory is just the partnership’s name. He added that it is subject to a Historic Preservation covenant and easement that will stay on the historic armory property. It can’t be demolished and any future work on the Armory will require it to be done subject to the covenants and easement and deed restrictions. All work must comply with the Secretary of the Interior’s standards that are the same as if the property is in a historic district.

Toulouse, however, was quite skeptical whether that covenant would continue as time marched forward.