Plannng Board

City of Trenton Planning Board Public Hearing Thursday, July 10, 2025 City Hall Members in Attendance: Charles Romanow, Chair Randy Baum, Vice Chair Caty Dominguez Anthony Santora Diana Walker Jonathan Conner Joseph Harrison Members Not in Attendance: Markus Green Jeff Halpern Staff in Attendance: Massiel Ferrara, Supervising Planner Andrei Alexeev, Principal Planner Michael Herbert, Planning Board Attorney Cherry Oakley, Planning Board Secretary PUBLIC HEARING The meeting was called to order at 7:07 PM by Mr. Romanow. The Open Public Meetings Act was announced and a quorum was verified. Case was called at 7:08PM The following people were sworn in: Applicant Professionals: Craig Stratton, Surveyor and Land Manager for Trenton Engineering Joe Messner, Architect Carol Pehnke, Traffic Engineer Elizabeth McManus, Planner Patrick Hyrz, Engineer 1 Board’s Professionals: Michelle Taylor, Planner Joseph Gray, Engineer Aaron Schrager, Traffic Engineer Exhibits: Exhibit A1 -- 10-29-24 Colorized Site Plan Exhibit A2--Set of Architectural Plans The Applicant’s attorney introduced the project under consideration for tonight. Mr. Stratton presented his credentials and was accepted as an expert before this Board. Referencing Exhibit A1, he described what is planned to be provided. He noted that there are no issues with the engineering comments that have been negotiated and discussed with the Board’s professionals. He described the ADA parking and the pedestrian route to the building. The plan is to provide a 6ft sidewalk by pulling the parking stall farther away from the building, which will improve access to the route to the building. The bike racks will be designed to make sure there is pedestrian access to the walkways. The landscaping will be reviewed to make sure there is no obstruction to the sight triangles. The intersection will be redesigned to make sure it’s ADA compliant. There is an existing ramp on site; however, it is not ADA compliant. Mr. Hryz presented his credentials and was accepted as an expert before this Board. He described the mix of bedrooms on each floor. He noted that the existing façade will remain and repairs will be made to fix any damage found. Mr. Pehnke reviewed the traffic study that the Applicant conducted. He noted that a modest amount of traffic will be generated from this project. There will be no new points of conflict; no new driveways. Emergency vehicles will continue to service the site in the same way they has been. A variance for the parking spaces is requested, where 33 are required and 18 are being provided. He reviewed the on-street parking in the vicinity of the site. There is a small loading space, smaller than is permitted, in the rear of the building. The parking provided will support both the residents and their visitors. He noted that the loading space is provided but likely will not be used. His indicated that the Board could recommend that the space be swapped out for a parking space so 19 spaces could be provided on-site. The parking spaces will be managed, requiring tenants to register their vehicles in order for there to be an equitable distribution of the parking available. The Board agreed that the loading zone should be removed and replaced with parking spaces. Ms. McManus presented her credentials and was accepted as an expert before this Board. She addressed the C Variances and the waivers that were identified in the application. She noted that the setback variance is needed only for the upper stories, as the existing footprint will not change. The existing lawn area will be preserved. They are 2 trying to maintain the historic view of the property. She noted purpose J criteria is what this project primarily satisfies. She noted that 1/3 of the units are undersized because of the uniqueness of the building. She noted that the size of the location of the four undersized units would create units that are too large, therefore dividing them into 4 would improve the affordability of the project and afford the resident an opportunity for less maintenance. This could serve people who tend to rent just a single room or prefer smaller homes. There is an awkward configuration of the current drive aisles but they are not unsafe. She noted that plantings have been provided where they could be provided. They are working with the Board’s professionals to ensure that the plantings and shielding provided is maximized. Ms. McManus reviewed the negative criteria and explained how this project does not have a negative impact and instead is an asset to the community. There is no substantial detriment to the community or the Master Plan. She noted that this does help Trenton meet their housing objectives. Ms. Taylor corrected and confirmed the bedroom count for the project. The Applicant will pave the drive aisle around their project as the pavement is very degraded. The Applicant was encouraged to approach the City and collaborate on the improvement of the roadway. The walkway on the adjacent property encroaches on this project but the Applicant has been unsuccessful at getting the property owner for that location to respond and collaborate on improvements. Mr. Hryz indicated that the basement is utilized only for utilities. There are bilco doors that are accessible only from the outside but not from any unit. The new ordinance does not require a loading zone and the undersized units in a mixed unit residence are allowable. Mr. Konstantine Isakov, the Applicant, was sworn in and testified that $800 - $1,600 is the planned range of rents for the units. The Board identified two trees that are not marked as being protected. The Applicant indicated that every tree that is healthy will be protected. The Board recommended that all of the trees that are planned should be shade trees and pulled within the property line. The Applicant will consider replacing the small hedge at the corner with two trees that will not obscure the sight line. The four azaleas will be replaced with plantings that will get larger and have a visual impact. Shields can be provided for the lighting if it is needed because of the night sky. The Board suggested that the Applicant think about a cantilever roof to protect any bikes that are locked up there. The Applicant stated he is wary about building what might be seen as another structure on the grand front yard but is open to suggestions on what bike rack to use. An 18-space rack or two 8-space bike racks are being considered. The front yard is enclosed with a 6-ft cast iron fence. Approve preliminary and final site plan with bulk variances and waivers for a 33-unit building. 3  Member Aye Nay Ab-stain Motioned Seconded Charles Romanow X Randy Baum X X Caty Dominguez X Anthony Santora X Diana Walker X Jonathan Conner X Joseph Harrison X X Adjourn 8:24pm Respectfully submitted Cherry Oakley, Planning Board Secretary 4