On Feb. 17, the Bethlehem City Council voted 5-1 to approve a seven-story apartment building at 33 West Walnut St., immediately behind Main Street businesses. Many people in Bethlehem agree that there is something special about the City of Bethlehem. Many of those would agree that our history is a significant part of that. And many of those would agree that Main Street is a significant part of the history. it is a primary reason why people enjoy living here and enjoy coming here.

Former mayor Gordon Mowrer once told told me that his biggest mistake as mayor was urban renewal, and later he realized the future was around the corner on Main Street. There is some similarity between urban renewal and the present penchant to build apartment buildings in so many places.

For make no mistake about it: a seven-story apartment building immediately behind Main Street businesses will irrevocably detract from the Main Street ambience. There is no way that a person will be able to look at Main Street and not also notice a seven story building hovering over the shops in the middle of the block, not at the end like the Hotel Bethlehem, which marks the end of the block, has open land to its side, and also contributes to the ambience.

If this building is approved, it will be a precedent, cited by other developers who will further detract from the historical charm of Main Street. This reminds me of the fable about killing the goose that was laying golden eggs.

So why do some people think this oversized building is a good thing? First, there are some people who may like change for its own sake. Anything different can be interesting. For such people, I say that not all change is progress.

Other people say that we have to either grow or die. This, I’m afraid, is balderdash. There are many places that aren’t growing but are thriving. I have some familiarity with two such places: Westfield, N.J., and Larchmont, N,Y. True, they are rather wealthy suburbs and/or exurbs of New York City, but the latter is what Bethlehem is starting to become. What kind of an exurb do we want to be? And when I say “we,” I mean all the people of Bethlehem.

Still other people may like the idea that as Bethlehem grows, it becomes more important. Being important is nice, but more important is being a meaningful place to live.

Other people may be intrigued by the notion that more people will mean more activities and new kinds of activity with additional stimulation. This argument has some validity. But like so many other things in city planning, there is a tradeoff. Is additional stimulation worth the reduction of a sense of calm in Bethlehem, especially as compared to Allentown? Calmness invites reflection, which is a fertile context for creativity. There is a reason why many authors do their writing in the country and then come to the cities for marketing and awards.

Another argument that has been made is that even luxury apartments help with affordable housing, by providing opportunities for existing residents to move up and provide vacancies in housing that is less expensive. This might be called the trickle-down theory of housing. I believe this effect to be rather small. Besides, it is much more productive to attack the problem of affordable housing headon. As an economist, I have developed a few ideas on this, to be presented at another time.

Another argument that has been made is that more residents mean more tax revenues. That is true, but what is not as well known is that residents consume more in services than they pay in taxes. Businesses, on the other hand, pay more in taxes than they consume in services. This is why cities all across America compete for more businesses. They do not compete to build more and more apartment buildings.

Still another argument that has been made is that the United States is a welcoming country, so Bethlehem should be a welcoming city for the immigration from New Jersey and New York City. But the two thoughts are not comparable, because there is plenty of open land in the U.S., but not in Bethlehem. So substantial immigration to Bethlehem means bigger and taller buildings.

Is that what the people of Bethlehem want?

If not, where is it written that people who do not live here now get to dictate what the Bethlehem of the future will look like?

The final argument is made on behalf of developers, so that they can make more money. I wonder if a six-story building would still be profitable. Perhaps a five-story building? Or even a four-story building? A three-story building would not be visible from Main Street.

It has even been suggested that a city park would be nice there. It could be a playground for children, supervised by one parent while the other parent is shopping. This would be good for the Main Street businesses.

I often think about Churchill’s remark that the invasion of North Africa in World War II was not the end, nor was it the beginning of the end, but it was perhaps the end of the beginning. If this seven-story building is built in this location, it will not be the end of the beginning, it will be the beginning of the end for Bethlehem as it has been known.