Advertisement
Advertisement

Wrestling the renewal conundrum

Having lived in a 51-year-old tenement building in Tsuen Wan for years, Wong Yan-chak hungers for an improvement in his living environment. 'I spotted marks of water seepage and signs of crumbling concrete on the ceiling of my flat a few months after a thorough interior renovation in late 2008,' the 60-year-old said.

'I guess the water dripping came as a result of a newly built bathroom for the master bedroom in the flat right upstairs. This could be a sign of a potential structural problem, which is what concerned me the most.'

Structural weaknesses caused by remodelling are one of the problems the authorities have focused on since the fatal collapse of an old tenement in To Kwa Wan in January. But it is not the only problem Wong, who lives on the second floor, has with his neighbours in the Chung On Street building. He points to a pile of stinking rubbish thrown on the balcony outside his flat, which keeps piling up despite his clean-ups.

The government says it wants to help residents like Wong, and passed an amendment to the Land Ordinance allowing developers to seek compulsory acquisition of the remaining shares in an old building where they already own 80 per cent instead of 90 per cent.

Critics say the measure, passed with the help of functional constituency lawmakers on March 17, rides roughshod over the rights of individual owners and plays into the hands of developers.

But Development Secretary Carrie Lam said improving the living environment and addressing disrepair in old districts were the main reasons behind the legislation.

She quoted an unnamed property owner as saying: 'I am in a constant state of anxiety, worrying about the safety of my family members. We live in a dilapidated tenement which now has no chance of redevelopment as a result of the huge amount of compensation demanded by some fellow owners, despite developers showing interest in acquisition.'

Wong could not agree more, saying the holdouts were often 'strategic investors' who had bought the flats in the hope of demanding 'astronomical' compensation. 'In the hope of getting rid of them, I'm wholeheartedly in favour of the new measure,' he said.

Ng Koon-wah, the chairman of the owners' corporation of the Feng Fong Building at 73 Caine Road in Central, agrees. Ng said more than 70 per cent of the 42 owners in the tenement had agreed to sell their flats, but the objections of a handful of fellow dwellers had 'spoiled everything'.

One of the holdouts, Dr Sunny Luk, 42, denied he was a 'strategic investor', even though he strongly opposed the acquisition. 'I've been living here since buying the flat in 1998. During the past 12 years, I've got married, aside from raising my three young kids here. There are plenty of unforgettable moments and cherished memories here. How can you say I'm a 'strategic investor'?'

Luk said he had no intention of selling the flat or accepting compensation offered by developers because he could not get enough to secure himself a new home of similar size in the same district. 'Above all, my parents and my sisters live in two separate residences within minutes of walking from mine on the same street for decades,' he said.

'I can scarcely imagine how my parents would be able to keep coming to my home and playing with their grandchildren on a daily basis, or how we could all gather together and enjoy morning dim sum on Sundays, if the family was forced to settle in a remote area like Tin Shui Wai, Chai Wan or Sai Kung.'

Also adamant that there are considerations other than money in deciding whether to sell a property is Victor Sin, the boss of half-century-old brand name Yat Lee Oil and Soy Sauce Shop in Haven Street, Causeway Bay, a stone's throw from Times Square. Sin has been forced to sell one property in the same street under the former 90 per cent rule and his two units in the other make up less than 20 per cent, leaving him vulnerable again. He said he was struggling to defend the family business he inherited from his late father and the jobs of three workers who had been with the tiny shop for decades.

During a protest against the new law with dozens of potential victims outside the Central Government Office on April 20, Sin said he did not want to sell the remaining properties, or the soya sauce shop would vanish to make way for chain stores such as Starbucks, Cafe de Coral or a 7-Eleven.

'My mother is 90 years old now. She is used to going downstairs, simply sitting there and chatting with regular customers in the shop for a while every day,' Sin said. 'It is not that we make a lot of money from selling a bottle of soya sauce.

'The shop is a precious legacy left by my father. It means a lot to her. At such an age, does it really matter if you offer her compensation of HK$5 million or HK$10 million?'

His mother was holding back tears as she looked at the shop where she worked with her late husband for decades. 'We have done no harm to others, we merely want to go on with our business and make a living on our own,' she said. 'But how come the government would do that?'

Hou Chi-wang, the owner of a flat at 565 Fuk Wah Street, Sham Shui Po, is suffering from anxiety and insomnia for fear a developer has secured 80 per cent of the building. He said his fears stemmed from the fact property agents had stopped calling or visiting him to press him to sell since the amended law was passed.

'One of them had offered me a HK$300,000 extra payment, in addition to HK$2.5 million, to buy my unit, for which I was asking for HK$4.3 million. The guy warned me that I might have to wait for compulsory auction after my refusal.'

Development Bureau figures show 18 flats in old tenements have been sold at their floor price in 21 compulsory sales since the adoption of the 90 per cent rule in 1999.

Chung Kim-wah, a Polytechnic University professor who studies housing policy and urban renewal issues, criticised the government for showing little respect for the right of private ownership - the core value and cornerstone of capitalism.

'Even if there are some 'strategic investors', private developers still have to negotiate with or make concessions to them when they want to buy their properties, as long as what they have done complies with the law,' Chung said.

It had been 'relatively acceptable' to introduce the compulsory sales policy in 1999 to remove hindrance to the redevelopment of old buildings because of widespread unclear ownership, amid public concern over the Garley Building fire in Jordan that killed 40 people in 1996, he said.

'But this time, speeding up reconstruction of old buildings is the major reason for the lowering of the selling threshold,' he said. 'This has undoubtedly given rise to speculation that the new measure has infringed the rights of private ownership.

'Our government seems too mercantile and tilted too much towards corporations, leaving society with less and less justice and fairness. As a result, a vicious circle develops when there is deep conflict, but the general public finds no way to sort it out.'

Recollecting what he saw during the legislative process for the new law from 10.30am until 10.30pm in the Legislative Council chamber on March 17, Sin said: 'I'm crystal clear that several lawmakers from the functional constituencies, including Timothy Fok Tsun-ting, Philip Wong Yu-hong, Andrew Leung Kwan-yuen, Lau Wong-fat and Sophie Leung Lau Yau-fun took no part in the hours-long discussion.

'They just came in for no more than 15 minutes - after the bell rang - to vote down all 14 amendments already passed by their geographical fellows through the mechanism of voting by groups,' he said.

Hou, Sin's companion at last month's protest, said it had helped him realise why some Hong Kong people kept struggling to abolish the functional constituencies. 'For the first time in my life, I'll definitely be there and join the annual mass marches on July 1,' he said.

Post