A. 
It is recognized that the ongoing repair and maintenance of buildings and structures within the Historic District can, on occasion, impose relatively high costs. In reviewing all applications, Council shall conduct a financial feasibility review if requested by the applicant in response to a request for a certificate of appropriateness. A financial feasibility review includes an applicant's claim of an unreasonable cost for repair, maintenance or replacement in-kind of all or part of a building or structure, an unreasonable economic return, as well as the cost of the work as recommended by the HARB. In all such cases, the HARB shall assemble sufficient documentation to submit for Council's financial feasibility review.
[Amended at time of adoption of Code (see Ch. 1, General Provisions, Art. I)]
B. 
The applicant shall submit a minimum of three estimates from bona fide contractors and/or vendors for any financial feasibility review. The HARB shall determine the condition of the architectural feature(s) based on its inspection, photographs or report from the COA Administrator, Building Inspector, Newtown Joint Historic Commission, Borough Engineer, preservation or other consultant.
A. 
For any financial feasibility review, the applicant must demonstrate that the cost of ongoing repair, maintenance or replacement in-kind is unreasonable or works an unreasonable economic hardship; that he and the owner of record, if different, are unable to obtain a reasonable economic return or a reasonable beneficial use from a contributing resource; or that the cost of the work recommended by the HARB would impose an unreasonable economic burden.
B. 
Council, and the HARB if authorized by Council, may receive and consider studies and economic analyses from other Newtown Borough agencies and from private organizations relating to the property in question.
A. 
Should the HARB recommend and/or Council determine that, as a result of the financial feasibility review, the criteria and/or requirements of this chapter result in an unreasonable cost for repair, maintenance or replacement in-kind of all or part of a building or structure, an unreasonable economic return, or the cost of the work as recommended by the HARB is unreasonable, the applicant and owner, if different, shall consider whether there are other uses or work proposals that would provide a reasonable return or not impose an undue economic burden while still meeting the overall intent of this chapter. The HARB, or the Newtown Joint Historic Commission, if relevant, may recommend to Council that special incentives be offered to the owner of the contributing resource to encourage the preservation, restoration and/or rehabilitation of the contributing resource.
B. 
Upon the prior approval of Council, the HARB may seek the assistance of appropriate local, state, county or national preservation organizations in developing options designed to relieve any financial infeasibility determination.