|
 The counter proposal put forward by Central wet market concern group, World City Committee, to the Urban Renewal Authority’s recently released plan to redevelop the Graham and Peel Street wet markets sites deserves celebration. Not not is it a sign of growing public appreciation of and concern for Hong Kong’s cultural heritage, but it reveals the rich contribution that the public can make to improve our city and society -- a resource hardly tapped by the authorities.
(reprinted from Positive News HK)
Graham Street and Peel Street accommodate a unique and historical wet market, that is a big draw to both locals and tourists. Domestic helpers and tai tais mingle amongst the flowers, dry foods, and vegetable and meat stalls in the mornings, and office ladies drop in to replenish their larders during lunch break. At most times, tourists can be seen, absorbing the exotic bazaar atmosphere to capture a glimpse of a rare face of Hong Kong. The place offers delightful little glimpses of the market’s long 140 year history, evident in, for example, Lan Fong Yuen, where you can squat on a stool 1950’s Chinese style, to sip your cup of milk tea.
The stalls, the hawkers, the small shops that line the streets add to the colour and charm of the experience. Many of the vendors here are seniors, who have been trading in this spot most of their lives. Undoubtedly, the buildings that flank the market are an integral part of this delightful setting.
 The URA proposes to do away with much of this charm, by tearing down all but four of the 37 buildings that flank the market, and constructing four huge towers around it: a 34 storey residential/commercial building, a 36-storey residential/commercial building and two tower blocks that would accommodate a 30-storey hotel/commercial building and a 37 storey office/commercial building around it.
Naturally, the plan has sparked a serious public outcry. People have been quick to point out that the URA have in fact passed a death sentence on their beloved market, as the vendors will not be able to carry out their business as usual during the long period of massive construction. Who, in their right minds, would want to go marketing in the midst of a construction site? Or who would want to sell in one? With no income, the vendors will be forced to seek other pastures.
Further, the public have pointed out that the attractive atmosphere of the place cannot be duplicated in a ‘themed old shop street”, as planned by the URA, especially one surrounded by plush high rises. Currently, this ambience is held in place by the surrounding low rise buildings. By replacing the natural wet market with an artificial ‘green area’, the URA will not be vitalizing, but sapping the area of its natural charm.
So, in a voice that has is becoming increasingly more clamorous, residents and concern groups put together a counter proposal that they hoped would enlighten the URA to the fact that there are other ways to revive and revitalize the site, whilst preserving its appeal.
The counter proposal, put forward by the World City Committee, allows for careful redevelopment of most of the 37 buildings in the area, and total demolition of only a few to make way for just two high rises. Redevelopment of the existing buildings is curbed by height, width restrictions and other provisions such as the need for ground floor shop space. In this way, the plan maintains the street market’s original fabric, allowing diversity and organic growth.
Vendors’ welfare is accommodated through the preservation of the location and the use of Gutzlaff Street and Kin Lau Lane as loading areas. The original look and feel of the wet market has been conserved.
The plight of the Peel Street and Graham Street residents is just one chapter in a series of revitalisation exercises that has seen the URA replace authentic pockets of culture with tacky themed communities that have irritated stakeholders as well as the public at large. Last year, the authority’s plan to renew Lee Tung Street (Wedding Card Street) was met with a hunger strike and protest march. More recently, the government moved to invite public opinion on the revitalisation of the former Central school site, which includes the ex-police married quarters on Hollywood Road, in Sheung Wan, whose saleable value is estimated at several billion dollars.
The URA's plan for the Central wet market, of course, reflects its commercial and financial considerations. Yet, revitalising sites should not be as simple as creating space to put up yet more characterless residential or commercial high rises, around token themed hubs, no matter how financial lucrative it might be. The distinctive features of the site require sensitive handling that looks not to demolish but to preserve. Replacement buildings must be appropriate and reflect the culture of the site.
As can be seen from the WCC counter proposal, the stakeholders’ ideas can be rich and beneficial to the community. It’s time for the URA to change its heavy-handed ways and enter into a consensus with all environmental groups, enterprises and the construction industry, so that they can all work together to tap the potential of such sites in revitalizing programmes.
The URA may be surprised at the rich choice of ideas that such consensus could yield. For example, it may open its eyes to the possibility of a bigger vision, linking the new developments on the Central water front with the central street markets. Soho, which serves as a lung to oxygenate Hong Kong’s high-pressure lifestyle for both locals and expatriates, naturally lends itself as a hub, flanked by the old central police station on one side, and the old police married quarters on the other. Such a centralized Soho can be hooked up to these sites by pedestrian bridges that can go over the traffic on Old Bailey Street and Aberdeen Street. If these areas were also linked up to Hong Kong Park and other small parks in the vicinity, Hong Kong’s CBD would benefit from an enhanced beautiful people friendly centre connecting different parts with green pedestrian corridors. With the threats of global warming and rising pollution, the need to preserve, conserve and enhance is imminent. Indeed, the time has come to consider such alternative ideas, rather than to add more fuel to the furnace that the city has become.
Today, even property owners are more likely to be driven by social and environmental responsibility than by compensation alone; they are no longer happy to take some money and leave the government to tear down their former workplaces. Rising social and environmental consciousness and the willingness to play a more active role in helping the government create a better life for the current and future generations is what drives groups such as the WCC. In a sense, organisations like the URA cannot afford to ignore these voices, which have the power to delay projects.
Rather than relying on bureaucratic correctness, the URA must adhere consultation in order to ensure that its revitalisation efforts do indeed create a better, caring and joyful life for Hong Kong.
Photos courtesy of Kwok Chan.
 |
17 to 29 November
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Show/Hide comments
Show/Hide comment form