Policy is best foundation for heritage conservation
The 1950s tenement buildings that are the heart and soul of Wing Lee Street have, hopefully, been saved. Just days before the Town Planning Board was to vote on an Urban Renewal Authority plan to demolish nine of them, the latter put forward an alternative proposal that would preserve all 12. No explanation for the about-face was given, but it came amid public pressure that had been stoked by a film set in the street winning an award in Europe last month. As welcome as the reversal is, the manner in which it has been presented is disappointing; clearly, political expediency rather than established principle-based policies are still driving heritage preservation in Hong Kong.
Government officials claim to have changed their ways. The protests over the demolition of the Star Ferry and Queen's piers in 2008 told them that public attitudes to the approach of development at all costs had evolved. There has been a welcome shift in the government's approach, with greater consultation and the publication of a list of buildings and places that have been determined to be worthy of preservation. But for all the expressions of a willingness to develop with community needs in mind, the Wing Lee Street case shows that a fundamental problem remains.
There is nowhere else like Wing Lee Street in our city. It is lined with tenements and while they are not architecturally striking or all in good condition, the ambience cannot be found elsewhere. They are without doubt worth restoring and keeping.
The URA had other thoughts. As part of a redevelopment plan for the area in Sheung Wan, it had determined that only three of the buildings should remain, and the rest would be removed to make way for up-scale projects. This is in line with the way it has gone about its work as a statutory body with, as its mission, revitalising Hong Kong - by buying up and tearing down poor neighbourhoods to make way for housing for the wealthy. The collapse of a building of similar vintage in To Kwa Wan in January and Tuesday's decision brought into question the URA's role. Government rules mean it has largely to fund itself, which results in its focus on lucrative projects. It should exist to fill the gaps not being dealt with by the market.
Tuesday's decision on Wing Lee Street was announced jointly with Secretary for Development Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor. She has repeatedly shown sensitivity to heritage issues. The URA does not have much of a track record in this regard, despite a policy shift two years ago to put more emphasis on the renovation of old buildings rather than tearing them down. In the absence of a reason for the Wing Lee Street turnaround, it is not far-fetched to assume the Crystal Bear awarded to the movie Echoes of the Rainbow at the Berlin Film Festival played a role.
Saving the street is good for Hong Kong. But if authorities had a firm heritage policy, it should never have been considered for redevelopment as the two adjoining areas still are. A prize-winning film has prompted a knee-jerk reaction and about-face. Preservation of history and historic memory must be based on a clear, transparent and well-defined approach. Despite pledges, it is still being determined on a piecemeal and disjointed basis. This has to change.
The URA should be playing a central role. Questions of whether there is a need to change the way in which it operates in the light of the building collapse in To Kwa Kwan should be considered carefully. Meanwhile, a sound government policy on heritage preservation could help the URA become a guiding light in setting the right balance between conservation and revitalisation.
