Has anybody out there built a rooftop structure and done it legally - ie. actually applied for permission? Or is it a case of just doing it and hoping the authorites won't come and knock it down? Tks for any advice.

_________________
Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears.

I think it's most unlikely you could get permission. However, you still see new enclosed rooftops going up, so it seems that people aren't too worried by all the Govt's hard talk last year. You're supposed to register your "illegal structure" with the Govt before this September I think, so maybe the trick is to get it up and registered by then, and then it'll be years (if ever) before anything is done about it. Standard canvas hoods should be ok if what Carrie Lam said in the article below stands. I'd keep your illegal structure under 50% if you decide to risk it and hope the neighbors don't start bitching. I 'd certainly bitch if an open view is suddenly blocked with a wall of glass and metal, ugly neon lighting and 50" TV.

Amnesty for illegal structures ruled out
Joyce Ng
Jun 23, 2011

The government has unveiled its proposals to crack down on illegal structures on village houses in the New Territories.

But there are questions over whether the policy to tackle an estimated 70,000 village houses can be enforced and criticism that rural residents will be allowed exceptions denied to urban dwellers.

The proposals, announced in Legco and to the media yesterday, come 15 years after the Ombudsman first criticised the government for cracking down on urban structures while not doing enough to control abuses in rural areas.

They divide the structures into three categories - those requiring immediate removal, those for removal later and those to be made legal. Severe breaches, dangerous structures and new work will be given priority.

Secretary for Development Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor again ruled out any amnesty or allowing owners to retain a structure on payment of a fee, as some rural leaders urge. "Any building works carried out in contravention of the law ... will not be permitted [or] rendered lawful by any administrative means," she told a short media briefing.

Rural leaders had earlier announced plans to surround Legco in a protest next week over the crackdown. And rural affairs body the Heung Yee Kuk is considering seeking a judicial review to exempt older buildings.

Structures where demolition will occur include houses of four or more storeys, which violate the standard three-storey format, as well as structures covering more than half the rooftop. Less serious breaches, including enclosed balconies and ground-floor extensions, will be dealt with in the second stage through a controversial registration system for which there is no timetable.

"By registration we don't mean an amnesty," Lam said, "It's only to ask property owners to come forward to provide information. This will help us grasp the situation better than if we send staff around."

Nine features which Lam said were unique to the village lifestyle, including rooftop gardening trellises and canvas hoods, would become legal. In urban areas, only three features are exempted.

Democratic Party spokesman on development affairs Lee Wing-tat said the government should keep a formal register instead of "outsourcing the job to owners".

With the policy's launch date yet to be announced, it will take at least six months - the usual time required for enforcement action - to tackle serious breaches of the rules.

Having been through the process of attempting, and eventually abandoning, getting a short-term tenancy for garden area, I can tell you with absolute certainty that the govt depts will *never* tell you what you *can* do; they will *only* tell you what you *cannot* do.

The logic is simple: if they told you what you can do, it is tantamount to giving permission for "something" to happen, and therefore, someone in govt is responsible, and will **forever be responsible**, for that decision. But as long as there is any possibility that your request can be denied, then responsibility is avoided and their collective asses are covered, and that's our tax dollars hard at work.

The whole exercise was a monumental waste of time...and that was for something outside the boundary of the house! For something like roof structures, forget it. If you do do it, just not to excess, and as low profile as possible.

_________________
Click here for Lamma-zine stories and recent Lamma Spotlights of the Week:
Photo, Video, Person, Wildlife, Bird, Artwork.

_________________
Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears.

_________________
Click here for Lamma-zine stories and recent Lamma Spotlights of the Week:
Photo, Video, Person, Wildlife, Bird, Artwork.

_________________
Click here for Lamma-zine stories and recent Lamma Spotlights of the Week:
Photo, Video, Person, Wildlife, Bird, Artwork.

Have you looked into the surprisingly numerous squatting, on-the-grid options in easily accessible villages?

There are quite a few full or semi-squatters around, sometimes in really old or abandoned buildings like the family living in the Shek Li ex-sanatorium for years, sometimes in empty but great flats above Hung Shing Yeh beach with seaview and Internet, like the German overstayer (who' still in prison, nabbed at the airport when going on a "business trip"?) There are quite a few nice, but unoccupied places around, empty for various reasons like the landlord trying to sell, waiting for the market to go up even more, or he's emigrated and can't be bothered to assign an agent or caretaker, or has almost forgotten about some neglected place his family has owned for decades, but would need some serious, expensive renovations to rent or sell it, or places under legal disputes within the family or unclear ownership, often dragging on for years through the courts while their formerly nice, often furnished flats remain empty.

And what happened to all the semi-legal, low-cost housing provided by Pinky Chan and other "slum landlords" before? Some of those tenants are still there, staying on at no or very low cost as their huts or pretty old buildings are OK to live in, but not quite legal and not officially permitted to be rented out.... People you see almost every day on Main Street are in long-term situations like this. These places have electricity, Wifi Internet (probably sneaked from a neighbour), water, sanitation, even aircons, and some are less than 20 minutes from a ferry pier.

To conclude, if you're willing to compromise on flat quality, legal status and dubious morality ... and are ready to be evicted at short notice, then your rent can go all the way down to zero on Lamma....

Note: The above is just for readers' information, but does not constitute my endorsement or recommendation of these low/no-cost rental options.

_________________
Click here for Lamma-zine stories and recent Lamma Spotlights of the Week:
Photo, Video, Person, Wildlife, Bird, Artwork.

_________________
Click here for Lamma-zine stories and recent Lamma Spotlights of the Week:
Photo, Video, Person, Wildlife, Bird, Artwork.

I think the 'September 30th deadline to declare' has a bit of a loophole in it.

As in many villagers over the past six weeks have been building illegal canopies, and rooftop areas..... and then they will contact the Government before the 30th to let them know that they have this.

And many years from now, the Government will come and check. And they won't be penalised, as they were honest according to the law apparently.