Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Allentown zoning board continues hearing on 436 N. 2nd St. after staff flags possible unpermitted uses
Summary
The board continued the special‑use application for 436 North 2nd Street May 11 after zoning staff reported street observations suggesting active auto‑repair and a dwelling on the property; the board asked for a site inspection or a formal site plan and granted a continuance at the applicant’s expense to allow staff to gather more information.
The Allentown City Zoning Hearing Board on May 11 continued the special‑use application for 436 North 2nd Street after city zoning staff reported conflicting field observations about the property’s current uses.
The zoning supervisor told the board that when staff posted the property they observed signs the site might be operating as an auto‑repair facility and also saw indications of a dwelling unit, despite permit and licensing records showing no recent active repair use. The supervisor said staff attempted to contact the owner by email but did not receive timely responses and that the issues were "germane to the instant matter."
Judith Mickett (the owner) was represented in part by her daughter, Donna Sensinger, who said the family operated a body shop until about 2022 and that part of the building has been rented. A tenant, Orlando, said he uses part of the property for graphic‑design work and social‑media content creation and parks a vehicle there; he denied that repair work is being performed on site.
The zoning supervisor advised that before the board can safely rule the office needs either a site inspection or a detailed site plan formally introduced into evidence, because the current testimony did not produce a clear image of all on‑site uses or whether some activities may require permits that the existing zoning would not allow. The board suggested the applicant move for a continuance at the applicant’s expense to allow the zoning office to gather accurate information and coordinate an inspection; the applicant agreed. Board members voted to accept the continuance and asked parties to exchange contact information for coordination.
The board told the parties that a continuance will require re‑notice and estimated applicants may expect to pay the notice cost (discussed on the record as about $400) to reset the hearing. The board will take up the case again after staff provides site information or after an inspection is completed.
