G.S. 84
RESTRICTED
XCR (80) 205
17
- 6 -
The Attorney General has advised that if the Club were to apply for a permit to demolish the existing building for redevelopment, after it had been declared a monument, and this permit was refused in order to preserve the building, the Club would be able to claim com- pensation for loss of redevelopment potential under section 8 of the Ordinance. As this situation has not yet arisen, there is no way of knowing how the District Court would assess the amount of compensation to be paid. However, it is likely that compensation would be based on the financial value of full redevelopment rights allowed under the lease as assessed by independent valuers. The Government's own estimate, which is based on the financial value of surplus development potential in excess of the Club's own requirements, is $430 M. While it is not certain that the Club would wish to claim compensation for loss of redevelopment rights, it is clear in the light of the Attorney General's advice that Government would be accepting a liability to pay such compensation by declaring the building a monument.
Alterative Solutions
18
The Heritage Society and the Conservancy Association have in the annexed petition suggested various methods of implementing the Board's recommendation that the building be declared a monument, without incurring a claim for compensation for loss of redevelopment potential, and they are:
(a)
(b)
(c)
Government grants the Club an alternative site to build a new Club building in return for surrender of the existing site and building which could then be put to public use, such as a library or museum;
resumption of the Club's existing premises, which could then be put to public use, if the Club were unwilling to accept a land exchange;
the Club retains the existing premises, but is allowed to transfer its development rights by selling its unused plot ratio to the owner of a nearby site.
RESTRICTED