- 49 -
produce.” At the Committee meeting of October 24, 1984, when the
budget for the Atrium was approved, considerations for completing
the Atrium that were noted in the presentation to the Committee
were as follows:
A. The Atrium retains a great deal of appeal;
architecturally, as an enhancement to the Bank's image,
and in value added to the properties.
B. We think our minimum cost not to build would
be about $16,000,000. It makes more sense to build it
for $25,000,000 than to not build it at a cost of
$16,000,000.
We believe that the Bank initially approved construction of
the proposed atrium in 1980 and entered into the commitment to
build in 1981 to address certain design issues and to enhance the
Bank's image; enhancement of value in the adjoining properties
was an ancillary consideration, and we so find. We believe that
the Bank's motivation derived, in significant part, from the fact
that the Developer and the 1700 Partnership would not have made a
commitment to build 1UBC had the Bank not made a commitment to
build the Atrium. When the budget for the Atrium was approved in
1984, enhancement of value of the adjoining properties was simply
one of many considerations that led to the budget's approval.
Lastly, the Bank was aware that any value to be added to the
property by the construction of the Atrium would not be fully
realized in a sale prior to completion of the Atrium;
nevertheless, the Bank sold 2UBC in 1985. In sum, upon
consideration of all the facts and circumstances, we believe that
Page: Previous 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011