The Civil Service Bureau is responsible for the management of the CBS, while the Development Bureau (DEVB) is responsible for matters relating to urban renewal. Last week colleagues from the two bureaux paid a visit to some CBS building residents and attended a forum. Let me state the views of DEVB on redeveloping CBS buildings.
The building scheme was launched under a unique historical context. Started in 1952, the Scheme allowed the Government to grant land at a concessionary price (usually at one-third of the full market value) to enable eligible civil servants to build residential buildings through co-operative societies. At the same time, the Government also provided loans for periods of up to 20 years to pay for land and building costs. The Scheme was terminated in the mid-1980s and a total of 238 CBS co-operative societies were established, with about 5,000 residential units built.
As these buildings are ageing and, in terms of current land use planning, the gross floor area of the land has not been fully utilised, there is potential for redeveloping the buildings. In fact, 11 of the CBS buildings have already been redeveloped, including the relatively large-scale site of the Belcher's in Western District.
During the forum, the residents mainly expressed their views on three aspects, including high land premiums and inadequate subsidies for building maintenance. Furthermore, they suggested that the Urban Renewal Authority (URA) should launch a new pilot scheme to proactively examine requests for redevelopment of CBS buildings.
Regarding the dispute over land premiums, the Lands Department is upholding professionalism and impartially examining all land premium applications according to relevant land lease conditions and prevailing policy. For the land premiums of CBS buildings, in general there are two phases. Firstly, if property owners want to sell their flats, they have to pay the premium for removal of alienation restriction, which is calculated according to the land value of recent use or after redevelopment according to the parameters listed on the land lease. Generally, the gross floor area attained by redevelopment according to the relevant land lease will be less than the gross floor area permitted by the latest Outline Zoning Plan. Therefore, if owners want to redevelop a whole building in order to fully utilise the potential of the land, they have to pay a further land premium. Ex-CBS members may apply to the Civil Service Bureau for allowing them to enter into sale and purchase agreements before payment of land premium. One of the reasons why some of the residents may consider the land premium to be too huge may be due to the fact that they only paid one-third of the full market value of the land in earlier years.
Regarding the building maintenance subsidies, residents of the remaining CBS flats may apply to the Buildings Department for loans under the Building Safety Loan Scheme. On the other hand, the owners from the dissolved CBS co-operative societies may apply to the Integrated Building Maintenance Assistance Scheme, which was launched by the Hong Kong Housing Society and the URA and offers financial assistance and technical support.
Furthermore, ex-CBS members can apply for redeveloping the buildings under the URA's "demand-led" pilot scheme after consolidating the property rights of their flats. The first and foremost consideration of the URA for examining these applications is whether the buildings are in a seriously dilapidated condition and whether the living conditions of residents in these buildings are poor. The URA has no intention to draw up a pilot scheme for redeveloping CBS buildings for the time being.
In conclusion, CBS buildings are a unique product under special circumstances and direct comparison should not be made with other private housing or Home Ownership Scheme buildings, as they are different in terms of land lease conditions, the structure of property rights and restrictions on sale. Regarding the issue of urban renewal, the Government and the URA would be fair and impartial to owners of CBS buildings and any other property owners. These owners may also invite private developers voluntarily to discuss redevelopment plans, and there have been many successful cases. As far as I know, the locations of many CBS buildings are advantageous and have a spacious environment. Lots of retired elderly people may wish to remain living in these locations to enjoy the rest of their life. Therefore we must identify those who wish to move out and find out what their reasons for doing so are and whether redevelopment is the best solution to the problem.
Some suggest granting concessionary premiums or even exemption for redeveloping CBS buildings. We must ask ourselves this: Do we have enough justification in the public interest for using taxpayers' money to help those owners who have already enjoyed low land prices in the past? On the other hand, in order to fully utilise land resources and release development potential, what else can we do? DEVB will remain open-minded and continue to communicate with all stakeholders and explore feasible solutions.
3 February, 2013
Back