Narberth council orders appraisals and fact-finding for borough—uilding and possible subdivision at 201

Council members on Thursday authorized staff to obtain appraisals and continue fact-finding about the borough-owned site referred to in the packet as "201," asking for specific valuations tied to a 1.5-acre subdivision scenario and for an adaptive-reuse appraisal of the existing building.

The request grew out of months of public comment and internal discussion about whether to preserve the whole parcel as parkland, to divide it and sell a portion to fund demolition and park expansion, or to pursue adaptive reuse of the building. Council members and residents repeatedly said they want better information before any decision.

"We need informed policymaking," Councilmember Maggie said during the floor discussion, arguing appraisals would help the borough weigh fiscal trade-offs. Councilmember Cindy said she prefers a smaller-development footprint that would expand green space, while other members said apartment or mixed-use development could create a higher sale price. Lawrence Goldberg and other public commenters urged a compromise that preserves at least about three acres of green space while allowing modest development that fits the neighborhood.

Manager Dodds and planning staff presented three conceptual subdivision options developed by the borough—onsultant (roughly 1 acre, 1.5 acres and 2 acres) and showed a diagram of how remaining parkland would grow under each scenario. Staff said the site contains less than 1 acre of green space today and that even the smallest subdivision concept would increase parkland compared with current conditions. Council asked the appraiser to assume the most likely zoning and to treat the 1.5-acre scenario as the primary option for cost estimates.

Council also discussed potential reuse of the building on the parcel. A private party (a local school) has expressed preliminary interest after reviewing the borough ssessment and requesting a walk-through. Council agreed that any firm proposal would be subject to public bidding and that the borough would retain and control the park area if it sold or leased the building. The agenda document staff circulated asked council to reaffirm a policy goal: that any outcome should maintain parkland equal to or greater than the site—urrent open space.

Council did not vote to sell or subdivide the property at the meeting. Instead members directed staff to obtain a cost estimate for appraisals: one appraisal of a 1.5-acre subdivision assuming (a) continued residential/multifamily-style zoning (the 3B/3C family residential types discussed in the packet) and (b) an apartment/mixed-use highest-and-best-use scenario. Staff will return with firm cost estimates for the appraisals before commissioning them.

Why this matters: The site and its future use have divided neighbors for years. Council members said they proposed appraisals to put actual numbers on options so a policy decision about parkland, housing and revenue can be made with clearer fiscal context.

What happens next: Staff will obtain cost estimates for the requested appraisals and return to council. Any sale or redevelopment would require further public review, conformity with zoning and subdivision rules, and a public bidding process if the borough decides to proceed.