About 35 small older buildings holding roughly 110 households sit in the affected 4a and 5b districts on lots that by-right rules could redevelop at three to eight times their current density.
I think some of them are still viable. However, much of the southern side of Haverford Ave in the town center is owned by one developer. From what I understand he had planned to rebuild with apartments over shop fronts. I think his financing got tight or it didn't work. It hasn't happened. I think he is in financial trouble now.
Anything built before and up to 1945 in Narberth falls under the HARB and cannot be torn down by right. It would have to be unsalvagable and a hardship on the seller.
I haven’t finished the whole article yet, but does this take into consideration the fact that you cannot tear down anything in Narberth that was built before and up to 1945?
What is your assessment of the downtown apartment rentals. Are the older apartments above store fronts viable?
I think some of them are still viable. However, much of the southern side of Haverford Ave in the town center is owned by one developer. From what I understand he had planned to rebuild with apartments over shop fronts. I think his financing got tight or it didn't work. It hasn't happened. I think he is in financial trouble now.
Anything built before and up to 1945 in Narberth falls under the HARB and cannot be torn down by right. It would have to be unsalvagable and a hardship on the seller.
Many of these buildings are post WWII
I haven’t finished the whole article yet, but does this take into consideration the fact that you cannot tear down anything in Narberth that was built before and up to 1945?
Not specifically, I did not have that data in front of me. But from what I understand most of these buildings are not "historic"