Plannng Board

City of Trenton Planning Board Conference and Public Hearing Thursday, March 23, 2023 Via Microsoft Teams or phone: 609-436-9298 The Conference ID is 412 046 968# Members in Attendance: Charles Romanow, Chair Randy Baum, Vice Chair Jonathan Conner Markus Green Jeff Halpern Patricia Ni’ma-Mohammed Anthony Santora Adam Weiss Members Not in Attendance: Wanda Swiggett Staff in Attendance: Michael Kolber, Senior Planner George McGill, Planning Board Attorney Cherry Oakley, Planning Board Secretary PUBLIC HEARING Current Planning Board Membership (as of 3/23/23) Class Term Ending Date Board Member I (Mayor’s Representative) Mayor’s Term Markus Green II (City Employee) 12/31/23 Anthony Santora III (City Council 12/31/23 Vacant Representative) IV (City Resident) 12/31/26 Patricia Ni’ma- Mohammed IV (City Resident) 12/31/23 Randy Baum IV (City Resident) 12/31/25 Jeff Halpern IV (City Resident) 12/31/23 Adam Weiss IV (City Resident) 12/31/25 Jamie Carpenter IV (City Resident) 12/31/26 Charles Romanow ALTERNATES IV (City Resident) 12/31/23 Wanda Swiggett IV (City Resident) 12/31/24 VACANT 1 The meeting was called to order at 6:05pm by Mr. Romanow. He read the Open Public Meetings Act and a quorum was verified. Memorialize the Resolution for 40 Enterprise Avenue with one amendment as read into the record by Mr. McGill. Member Aye Nay Ab- Motioned Seconded stain Charles Romanow, Chair X Randy Baum, Vice Chair X X Jonathan Conner X Jeff Halpern X X Patricia Ni’ma-Mohammed X Anthony Santora X Adam Weiss X Mr. Jonathan Conner was sworn in by Mr. McGill. Mr. Kolber announced that the DRAFT Land Development Ordinance is in its Public Comment period. The DRAFT can be seen and commented on at www.Trenton250LDO.com Save the Date – there will be 2 bicycle Open Houses, Tuesday, April 25th at the James Stubblefield Center and May 7th at the Sam Naples Civic Center. There will be bicycle safety lanes outside of these two Senior Centers, free ice cream will be distributed, and feedback will be collected on the bicycle safety and integration plan for the City. April 13th Planning Board Meetings will be the presentation DVRPC will be the City’s partner in these presentations on the City’s bike safety and integration plan. PUBLIC HEARING Item #1 22-P-ROEB3: Roebling Block-3 Site Plan Amendment -Trenton NJ The applicant is seeking to amend the Final Site Plan previously approved by Planning Board on December 13, 2012. Site Plan for additional residential units and revised parking. To construct one additional residential building (Building 103) on lot 1.04. Building 102 is to be amended from mixed-use residential/retail to 100% residential with 30 units. which is part of the premises to construct 30 loft rental apartments. Amend plans for Buildings 104 and 105 to increase commercial/retail space by ≈ 2,000 SQFT and reduce residential units by 2 units on lot 1.05. Also, amend the surface parking area with a reduction of 11 parking spaces and a change in traffic circulation within lot 1.02. The site is in the Industrial A (IA) 2 Zone District and the Roebling Complex Redevelopment Area; Location Addresses: 10 Elmer St., 41-55 Clark St., and 30 Elmer St., City Tax Map Block (s) 15901 Lot(s) 1.02, 1.04 & 1.05; Applicant, Block 3 Urban Renewal, LLC 105 Mercer Street, Trenton, New Jersey 08611 Board Member Mr. Adam Weiss recused himself from considering this matter because of a conflict of interest with one of the principal applicants. Mr. Jeff Hall, Esq. representing the Applicant described why the Applicant is present before the Board. He described the boundaries of the original approval. He noted that this project does not require the Landmarks Commission’s review. Mr. William David Henderson was sworn in, presented his credentials, and was accepted as an expert before this Board. He presented the differences between the plans approved in 2012 and the current changes that are planned. He detailed the bedroom changes, the planned retail/restaurant, and the dimension changes in the room sizes. Mr. John Hatch, Principal and Lead for this project was sworn in, presented his credentials, and was accepted as an expert in architecture and historic preservation before this Board. He gave an update on progress at the site, showing before and after photos of each of the developed buildings and the renderings of the building that is being marketed currently and marked as Exhibit A1. Referencing a Site Aerial of the Site and the Project Area (Exhibit A2) Mr. Hatch he pointed out building 103, the building under discussion tonight. He described the improved plaza changes and the reconfigured parking. Bike bollards will be installed that were not planned for before. Mr. Hatch reviewed (Exhibit A3 and A4) Floor Plans for each floor for proposed buildings 103 and 102 and described the square footage of the buildings, bedrooms, and interior dimensions of the rooms. Referencing the Building Elevations and a color rendering of the proposed new building marked as Exhibit A5, Mr. Hatch described the appearance of the façades. He noted some signage is proposed for the building which includes the #30 for the address and another sign describing information about the historic building. There has been an increase in the number of trees. There were not any added to Elmer Street as their location of them would prevent them from surviving. The trees are low maintenance, drought resistant, and recommended for urban settings. Building 102 will hold the mailroom for both buildings. All of the units are convertible to fully accessible units when needed. He reviewed the Board’s professionals’ comments and reviewed what he addressed. The landscaping in the parking lot was approved with a variance so trees in the parking lot are not required. The Applicant said that they are willing to look at the parking lot plans and are not averse to adding trees if it’s possible without jeopardizing any parking spaces. Mr. Baum offered to assist with assessing what can be done. The trash will be rolled out to the street along Elmer Street into the dedicated spaces for them. There will be lights associated with the short end of the building for safety. 3 Maintenance personnel might push the receptacles out to the curb. There is also an electric device called a ‘Waste Caddy’ that is used for heavier containers to push the receptacles at a low speed out to the curb. The geometry has been considered to make sure that is possible. This is how the trash is managed in the currently operational buildings. Mr. Brian Boccanfuso offered that the plantings will need to be maintained in order to establish themselves and not die and a condition of approval will be added related to this point. Mr. Lous Zuegner, Principal at his firm, was sworn in and presented his credentials and was accepted as an expert in the fields of Civil Engineering and Planning. Referencing Exhibit A7 Site Rendering dated March 22, 2023 he described the changes that were made to the original plans of reconfigured parking, access, two-way circulation, and EV charging stations. Although this project does not fall under the requirements to provide EV charging stations, the Applicant wants to provide these stations so they have added them to the plan. He described the 15-minute parking spaces that are used for loading and unloading deliveries. Elmer Street is actually an access easement and not a functional throughway street. Mr. Hatch indicated that the hardscape has been reduced and even though the size of the plaza has been reduced the number of trees has increased from 52 to 66. He indicated that functionally the building placement maintains the façade line. All of the façades were updated to be similar instead of disparate as previously approved. They are asking for relief from providing the extra loading area with the addition of building 102. He detailed how the goals of this plan provide for the public good and are consistent with the Master Plan. He noted that behind Building 105 and 104 are individual private parking spaces and miniature backyards. He commented how the Redevelopment Plan encourages shared parking, so this plan relies on that guidance. Mr. Henderson reviewed the 4 easements available in this Redevelopment Area, who is responsible for maintenance. Mr. Zuegner described how stormwater drainage works on the site. Mr. Kolber, Senior Planner for the City of Trenton, was sworn in and testified that the City does agree with this project and it should be supported. Mr. Hall indicated that the original application was presented to the Landmarks Commission. They did try to bring the updated plans before the Commission and have not been able to get in front of them for their last two meetings but were not able to hear them because Landmarks did not have a quorum. A condition of approval will be confirming compliance with the State’s stormwater requirements. Mr. Kolber noted that the sense of safety walking to the light rail station is not good and asked for improvements that might improve the pedestrian experience in that area. Mr. Hatch indicated that when building 114 is developed that walkway will improve considerably. Mr.Henderson described the potential for driveable paths, bike paths, and bridges over 129. Mr. Kolber indicated that having public art there would be greatly encouraged. Mr. John Jahr sought clarification for problematic site circulation internal to the site that might be difficult for the Applicant and not anyone else. Mr. Zuegner responded to a 4 question from Mr. Jahr that emergency services can gain access to the site by either with their own key fob or by accessing an emergency services box that lets them gain access. Mr. Zuegner indicated that they will work with emergency services on what their preference is for gaining access to the site. Mr. Henderson described how they worked with emergency services around building access with the previous sites that were already developed. The system that this Applicant uses is web-based so it can be controlled remotely to allow acces as well as there being a mechanical solution for gate access as a back-up The bicycle parking is planned to be internal to the building as it will be locked and out of the elements. There will also be bicycle bollards. The parking spaces will not be assigned spaces in order to assure optimal use. There will be non-moveable benches on the plaza. Mr. Romanow asked if there was anyone from the Public who wanted to speak or against this application. With no answer from the gallery the following vote was set forth: Motion to approve amended Site plan with Variance relief as conditioned: Variances for the setback of Building 102, no trees in the parking lot (previously granted), fewer and smaller loading spaces, façade variance for building 102 and 103, and waiver from returning to Landmarks, final landscape plan, comply with stormwater requirements as per DEP, submit details for the internal bicycle parking, and move one on-street parking space to improve visibility. *The Applicant offered to do a courtesy review with Landmarks Commission once that Board has a quorum. Member Aye Nay Ab- Motioned Seconded stain Charles Romanow, Chair X Randy Baum, Vice Chair X X Jeff Halpern X Anthony Santora X X Patricia Ni’ma-Mohammed X Meeting adjourned at 10:30pm Respectfully submitted Cherry Oakley, Planning Board Secretary 5