Fall of fence sparks online debate about housing rights in Beijing

Chinese netizens debated on Sina Weibo over the weekend on the management of residential property after angry apartment owners tore down an iron fence that separated a residential compound in northeastern Beijing.

The fence, which separated the high-end commercial homes and apartments for non-investment purposes, was torn down on Friday in a compound developed by Hong Kong-listed Longfor Properties Co, caixin.com reported on Saturday.

In the Longfor block commercial apartment was priced at about 70,000 yuan ($10,835) per square meter while the latter was sold at around 22,000 yuan per square meter. The fence was later restored.

Housing for non-investment purposes is a specific category in Beijing. These units, which are cheaper than other types, are built by developers as part of a package with regular commercial homes.

Representatives of Longfor went to the Chaoyang district housing and urban-rural development authority to report and discuss the matter, caixin reported.

Some comments on Weibo showed concern over the fall of the wall and the rights issues involved.

Some claim the commercial home owners would refuse to pay property management fees in response, reducing the commercial value of the property as a result. Others said that costs and benefits should be equal.

One blogger told the Global Times on Sunday that he lives in another property developed by Longfor in western Beijing where there is the same issue, and he wants to "defend property owners’ rights.”

Those who supported the tearing down of the fence said that the existence of the fence breaks a provision of the contract on public green spaces and blocks firefighters' access.

Yan Yuejin, a research director at the Shanghai-based E-house China R&D Institute, told the Global Times on Sunday that the incident stems from disagreement over the use of public facilities.

Yan said the developer should open the space to honor the government’s call that “houses are for living” but the incident underlined the need for innovative execution.

“Green shrubs can be considered instead of iron fences. Also, the property management firm can impose a security check at night,” Yan said. “If these measures are executed skillfully, the owners on both sides won’t confront each other. This is the type of harmony and civilized atmosphere called for by 'the houses are for living' doctrine.”

The 19th National Congress of the Communist Party of China held in October 2017 reiterated that houses are for living, not for speculation.

“The tearing down of the wall incident will spark discussion among property developers, property mans agement companies over the rights anand regulators property owners, especially those of public facilities inside the residential compound. Such rights and obligations will in the future enjoy more clarity in contracts,” Yan said.

Fu Liang, a Beijing-based commentator, said that the problem could be solved if contracts specified there would be two separate sections of a compound built on one site.

“In some residential blocks, the two sections are separated by one road right from the planning stage, which makes the two sides independent from each other and avoids such a problem,” Fu said.

Public rental housing compounds face similar issues, and innovation in management is needed, noted Yan.