Council introduces citywide redevelopment plan for Trenton as a rehabilitation area; planning board review set

The Trenton City Council voted to introduce an ordinance to adopt a citywide redevelopment plan designating the city as a rehabilitation area, setting out a 30‑year enforcement period and protections that foreclose the use of eminent domain under that designation.

Director Art Liston of the Department of Housing and Economic Development told the council that the redevelopment plan's goals are to eliminate conditions that identify the area as in need of rehabilitation, stimulate private investment, make federal/state/county/local resources available, and foster public‑private partnerships to revitalize the city. He said the process requires the council to pass the ordinance for first reading and then send the plan to the Planning Board for review; the Planning Board review was scheduled for April 10.

Council members asked specific legal questions about the plan. One councilor asked whether the plan would allow circumvention of zoning board duties; Director Liston replied, "No. It actually, gives planning board a little bit more involvement in the planning of the community." The ordinance text notes that a rehabilitation area does not authorize property acquisition by eminent domain. Director Liston and counsel clarified that "this does not allow that"—rehabilitation areas preclude eminent domain, and any clawback authority to recover property for failure to meet redevelopment agreements would rest in deed restrictions or contract provisions executed in redevelopment agreements.

Council members also pressed counsel on whether an invalidated clause would void the entire plan; counsel described the clause as a savings clause and confirmed that if a single provision is found invalid, the remainder of the plan would remain in force.

The council approved the ordinance for first reading (introduction), and the measure will proceed to the Planning Board for formal review and recommendation before a second reading and final council vote. The ordinance text sets a 30‑year effective period for the plan and states it may be amended in response to statutory or case‑law developments.

Members discussed the potential future use of eminent domain in narrow, later proceedings: council members noted redevelopment plans that exclude eminent domain can be replaced by more targeted plans that permit condemnation only when other remedies are exhausted and when the administration brings a separate redevelopment proposal that includes eminent domain authority.