06/16/2026
TODAY'S HEADLINES:
Residents continue campaign against rezoning in Glenmont
“The changes to the town code will be straightforward, but we pushed out the timeline for the zoning code update to make sure that we get them right,” VanLuven explained.
Less straightforward is the ongoing debate about shifting Bethlehem’s residential neighborhoods currently classified as residential “A” to low-density residential. The Town’s LDR reclassification continues to draw residents’ ire, particularly those living in Glenmont, where development is likely to occur
For more than two hours during the June 10 meeting’s public comment period, residents pummeled the board with opposition to the proposed amendments. Of 48 public commenters, just three spoke in favor of the amendments. Several speakers noted that those speaking in favor live in single-family homes in Delmar and will not be impacted by the amendments.
“They don’t experience what we do,” said Glenmont resident Karen Harmon.
Those in favor of the amendments spoke to the importance of creating diversified, affordable housing. Samuel Kernan, a Delmar resident, said the solution is not to lower the density cap but to build sidewalks and bike lanes.
One speaker, Colleen Scott, took issue with any accusations of classism or racism. She said no one objects to renters, but in reality the board has no ability to affect the price of homes or apartments that are to be built.
“I invite you to come sit on my lawn and come up with a solution,” she said.
Other speakers repeated the idea that increased density does not equal affordability. Barbara Hasselback, a Glenmont resident, pointed out that a recent nearby Amedore development consisted solely of homes selling for over $700,000.
Martin Fogelman of Glenmont said that, based on recent trends, any new apartments will likely rent for at least $ 2,500 per month, which will not attract new residents. Glenmont resident Anita Stein noted that at the last meeting VanLuven recognized that apartments built would lease at market rates, which, she said, in Bethlehem translates to unaffordable. She chided the board for failing to define affordability in the proposed amendments.
Others raised concerns about expanding housing diversity without access to public transportation. Bruce Grossman, also of Glenmont, said the board’s talk of providing housing for the “missing middle” was based on a flawed theory involving urban, not suburban, housing in walkable, transit-accessible areas.
“You can drink the Kool-Aid or hear our words of wisdom,” he said.
Another speaker urged the board to consider board member David DeCancio’s recommendation at the previous meeting to open areas near existing transit lines that are walkable, such as Vista Tech Park, New Scotland Road and Delaware Avenue, to locate higher-density housing.
Speakers focused on traffic safety, congestion and ensuring that Bethlehem does not become another Clifton Park or Colonie, avatars of suburban sprawl.
Residents were also leery of assurances from Bethlehem Economic Development and Planning Director Robert Leslie that the visual impact of any higher-density developments would be limited by the planting of shrubs and setbacks.
“You can put lipstick on a pig, but it’s still a pig,” said Jessica Dively, a Glenmont resident.
They expressed disbelief at the town’s insistence that Glenmont roads could handle increased traffic or that higher density would not increase traffic.
“I’ve heard from the town that traffic is not a problem. After living here only four years, the traffic definitely changed,” said Glenmont resident Michelle Murray.
Glenmont resident Elizabeth Nolan echoed the sentiment that traffic has increased significantly during the past few years.
Speakers also questioned the inconsistency between the town’s investment in open space and proposed amendments that increase density. One Elsmere resident said the town’s 2022 updated Comprehensive Plan, which those in favor of higher density cite as a mandate to increase density, also emphasizes conserving open space. She puzzled over how VanLuven and board member Maureen Cunningham could endorse what she called this “zany law,” knowing how committed they are to land conservation.
Residents again spoke about being blindsided by the LDR label, which they found misleading.
“Using the term low-density borders on unethical,” said Glenmont resident Julie Heslin-Pokit.
They asked the board to slow down the process and to listen to their constituents. Janis Thompson, who appeared in red along with many of her neighbors, said she spoke on behalf of the community when she asked the board to conduct a needs assessment and a traffic study before voting.
Delmar resident William Sharp, who described his significant professional experience in planning and zoning law, cautioned the board, “You are facing one of the most consequential votes of any Town Board in Bethlehem’s 233-year history.”
Sharp warned, “If you vote to adopt the proposed amendments, you are steering Bethlehem toward the fate of other towns in the Capital Region that lost their identities.”
“Three out of five of you gotta say no,” said Glenmont resident Steve Peterson.
