Lease Modification for a Data Centre: Measuring First, Advising Second
You are a surveyor advising a developer who owns an industrial lot in Kwai Chung. The lot has a site area of 2,850 m², a two-storey godown with a measured GFA of 5,700 m², and a lease user clause of 'godown and ancillary office'. The developer wants to convert it into a 12-storey data centre with 9,500 m² GFA, including offices, customer service counters and a small retail shop. The lease has a plot ratio cap of 2.0 and a height restriction of three storeys. The OZP zoning is 'Industrial' and the developer's planning consultant says a data centre is 'always permitted'. The developer asks you to prepare a survey report confirming the existing GFA and site area so that the architect can lodge a lease modification and building plans immediately. The existing godown has an unauthorised mezzanine of 350 m² and a covered yard of 180 m² that may or may not count as GFA.
1. How would you establish the site area and existing GFA, and what specific issues in this lot must you resolve before certifying figures?
Read the worked answer
I would start from the lease and the registered lot plan, not from the developer's brief. The site area of 2,850 m² should be checked against the lease plan dimensions and a measured boundary survey. Any discrepancy between the lease plan and the physical site must be explained before the figure is used.
For GFA, I would apply the definition that governs the submission. The lease may define gross floor area, and the Buildings Ordinance and its regulations define it for building plans. These are not always identical. I would measure the godown floor by floor, including the 350 m² mezzanine and the 180 m² covered yard, and record how each area is treated under the relevant definition. I would check whether the mezzanine is authorised, whether the yard is covered or open, and whether any plant rooms, lift shafts or car parks are exempt or excluded.
I would also check for unauthorized structures, encroachments and any area that has been omitted from the previous GFA figure. The report should reconcile the measured 5,700 m² with the lease and the approved plans. I would not certify a figure until the definition, the measurement basis and the treatment of the mezzanine and yard are stated.
2. What are the lease, planning and building control issues that the developer appears to be overlooking, and what sequence of approvals would you recommend?
Read the worked answer
Several issues are apparent.
- User clause: 'godown and ancillary office' is not a general industrial or data-centre user clause. A data centre with offices, customer service counters and retail may not fall within it. That requires a lease modification or waiver, not just a planning permission.
- Plot ratio: 9,500 m² divided by 2,850 m² is about 3.33, which exceeds the lease cap of 2.0. The lease cap must be modified or the scheme redesigned.
- Height: 12 storeys exceeds the three-storey lease restriction.
- Planning: 'always permitted' under the OZP, even if correct, does not override the lease. A planning application may still be needed for the scale or use, and conditions may apply.
- Building control: the conversion needs approved building plans, and the existing unauthorized mezzanine may need regularization or removal.
I would recommend: first, a measured survey and lease/planning audit; second, a planning application and pre-submission discussion; third, a lease modification application with a premium assessment; fourth, building plan submission; and only then construction. The architect should not lodge plans on the assumption that approvals are automatic.
3. What would you put in your survey report, and what would you refuse to state?
Read the worked answer
The report would contain:
- the purpose and scope of the survey;
- the documents examined, including the lease, lot plan, approved plans and OZP extract;
- the survey method, control and accuracy;
- the measured site area and a dimensioned plan;
- the measured GFA by floor, with a clear table showing the mezzanine, covered yard and any excluded areas;
- the definition of GFA used and the assumptions made;
- the location and extent of unauthorized or doubtful structures;
- limitations and matters requiring legal or planning advice.
I would refuse to state that the proposed data centre is 'always permitted', that the lease already permits the use, that the plot ratio or height restrictions are satisfied, or that the existing mezzanine is authorized. Those are legal, planning and building control conclusions. I would also refuse to certify a GFA figure that depends on an unresolved definition without showing the alternative figures. The report should be factual, transparent and usable by the architect without overstating the surveyor's role.