What do you think of the winning design for Tai O?
The winner of the conceptual competition for the revitalisation of Tai O was recently announced ('Preserving past best way to revive Tai O, say design winners', September 9).
The winning proposal calls for revitalisation, with minimum intervention. Such a strategy, although technically viable and architecturally appropriate, is financially unsound, and I suspect it does not conform to the government's internal policy of creating reasonable profits from any developments or redevelopments. The government will struggle to develop Tai O if it follows this strategy.
In Hong Kong, it is difficult to create something of significance or to implement a project that makes only very subtle changes. The best example for the former is the proposal for the development of West Kowloon Cultural District.
The magnificent micro-climatic canopy was criticised for the maintenance costs that would be involved.
Critics seemed to have forgotten that it had been chosen because the brief was to come up with a design that would put Hong Kong on the international map, which the giant canopy would have done.
Creating a micro-climate would have been a first for any city.