Allentown HARB Meeting - June 10, 2026
Allentown Historic Architectural Review Board (HARB) Meeting
Note: The meeting transcript indicates the meeting was held on June 1, 2026, but the provided date for the summary is June 10, 2026. The following summary adheres to the instructed date.
The HARB meeting on June 10, 2026, addressed two main items: a violation correction for a door replacement at 233 North Ninth Street and a discussion regarding the previously approved Ripple church conversion project, specifically concerning window replacement plans. The board denied the door legalization request and engaged in an extensive discussion about interpretation discrepancies in the church project's approved plans.
Consent Calendar
- Minutes from May 4, 2026: Approved by motion from Dave, seconded by Philip. All in favor, none opposed.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Michelle Evans (property owner, 233 N 9th St): Explained that the original historic double door was rotted beyond repair due to safety concerns (could not lock, transient entry issues). She provided a contractor’s letter stating the door was unfixable. She expressed that she was unaware of the need for a certificate of appropriateness (COA) before replacement, having not received notification from the city when the property transferred to her.
- Ripple representative (church project): Expressed concern that the Ripple project was placed back on the agenda without notification. Stated that the plans were not changed; the residential use always required all 14 windows to be replaced with clear glass. Emphasized the project's preservation efforts and that another option would have been demolition. Noted that many neighbors support the project.
Discussion Items
- 233 North Ninth Street – Door Violation Correction: Staff read the building description and guidelines. The replacement fiberglass pre-hung door is smaller than the original opening, with filler panels, and does not match the historic style or proportion. Staff recommended denial. Board members discussed the condition of the original door (lack of photographic evidence) and the new door's compliance with guidelines. They concluded the door design is not historically appropriate.
- Ripple Church Conversion – Window Replacement Discrepancy: A board member (who identified themselves as representing West Park) raised concern that October 2023 plans showed only four windows being replaced (on the east and west elevations), but November 2023 plans indicated all 14 windows on those elevations would be replaced. The board member felt deceived and wanted to correct the record. Other board members stated they always interpreted the plans as covering all windows. Staff clarified that the original plan notation was ambiguous (showing arrows at each end), but the intent was always all windows. No vote was taken; the discussion was informational. The board acknowledged the difficulty of reviewing plans in hybrid meetings and the need for clearer plan notations and staff reporting in the future.
Key Outcomes
- 233 North Ninth Street: Motion to deny the application for approval of the door installation violation was made (citing guidelines 3.6.8, 3.6.9, 3.6.11) and seconded. The board voted unanimously to deny. The denial will be forwarded to City Council. The property owner was encouraged to find a historically appropriate replacement door and communicate with staff for potential resolution before council action.
- Ripple Church Conversion: No formal action was taken. The board concluded that the COA issued 2.5 years ago cannot be rescinded. A board member expressed the desire to have only four windows replaced, but the majority did not support revisiting the decision. The discussion highlighted the need for clearer plan submissions and staff reports in future applications.
Other Business
- A board member pointed out errors in the historic design guidelines document regarding door terminology (incorrect arrows labeling parts of the door frame). This was noted as a future clarification item.
Meeting Transcript
Uh into the historic architectural review board meeting of June 1st, 2026. Harb is an advisory body to city council. City Council renders the final decision of HARB recommendations. Under the direction of the historic design guidelines, HARB review covers the general design arrangement, texture, material, and color of a building restructure. We'll also examine how these factors relate to similar features around your building. Anyone in attendance wishing to comment on any of the listed items on tonight's agenda are required to sign in for reference purposes. Sign the sheets right there by the door. Staff will introduce and present the proposal through a prepared report and provided to the applicant and board members for review prior to this evening's meeting. The applicant can then provide additional context to the proposal before discussion. Presentations are limited to 30 minutes and comments from any interested party other than the applicant to five minutes. After the presentation, the board will discuss the merits of the project among themselves, but will ask the applicant and staff for relevant information to supplement the discussion. After the deliberation, HARP will recommend to approve as submitted or approve with conditions, deny with explanation, or table the project for further discussion. If the applicant is not present at the meeting, or information pledge is not sufficient, the board may table a project until the next meeting to provide the opportunity. Proposal will only be tabled once. If requirements are not satisfied with the polling meeting, the board may automatically recommend for denial and require the applicant to reapply for a new certificate of appropriateness. Our recommendations will be forwarded to the next available city council meeting for climate resolution. And meanwhile, no work can proceed until council resolution or certificate of appropriateness is received. Once received, you will then be able to pull any official permits associated with the project. All right, let's move on to roll call. All right, we'll begin roll call. We have AJ Jordan. Here. We have David Hubert. Here. Bill Park. Here. Alex N. Skalestry. Here. Addie Shire. One accent. We do have quorum. All right. Thank you. We'll move on to minutes from the May 4th, 2026 meeting. Have everyone had a chance to read the minutes. Any comments or updates? Oh, is there a motion to approve minutes? By Dave, second by Philip. Those in favor of approving May 4th minutes. Okay. Any opposed. Okay. Move on to new business, 233 North Ninth Street. Michelle Evans. All right. Do you want to move up to the table? I'll set we'll begin with the staff reading. Violation correction. Building description.
openpublica.com