Dissonance
- Who is the owner of old Wan Chai Market? -
How different stakeholders participated in the redevelopment project?
Governmental organization: Urban Renewal Authority(URA)
Give general direction to the project
URA was established in 2001 to replace the Land Development Corporation (LDC) and take over the WanChai market project. According to URA website (Urban Renewal Authority 2014), it describe itself as actively engaged in redevelopment and rehabilitation project to achieve sustainable development in Hong Kong which duties include land use planning, urban design, heritage preservation and revitalization.
SCMP (Wu, 2007) reported that “In 1997, property developer Chinese Estates Holdings formed a joint venture with Land Development Corporation to redevelop Wan Chai”. WanChai market was one of the affected buildings under the plan. As URA holds only a minority equity stake in the joint venture, URA has limited influences in the WanChai market redevelopment plan(SCMP 2004). Although URA took an passive act in the project and it didn’t participate a lot after selling WanChai market to Chinese Estates Holdings, it still responsible for determining the general direction of the redevelopment project which fits the overall urban design in Hong Kong. Besides, URA also acted as an consultant to the property developer, it gave opinion about the importance of heritage preservation in the WanChai redevelopment project although it wasn’t the one to make final decision.
Developer: Chinese Estates Holdings Limited
Decision Maker, Powerful
In February 1996, Chinese Estate Holdings(CEH) and with three other public listed companies formed a consortium and they gained the Wan Chai redevelopment right by signed a contract with LDC. According to CEH milestones(Chinese Estates Holdings Limited 2014), it “had 40% interest in the consortium in the beginning which was subsequently increased to 83% attributable interest”. With the majority shareholdings, CEH became the major decision maker of the redevelopment project and it focused on how to make profit through urban development. After CEH’s decision is made, it informed the community what to do, not much consultation conducted in this project.
Locals: stall owners, residents live in Wan Chai
Decision Taker, Powerless
An academic paper point out that Hong Kong government usually adopts top-down approach in urban renewal projects(Sin, 2009). Only part of the information is presented to the community with limited public consultation. All decision were made by minority officials and professionals where the public are not empowered to decide their community’s destiny. Situation is similar in Wan Chai redevelopment project, stall owners and Wan Chai residents are decision taker, they have no say to alter the decision of developer.
According to Sherry R. Arnstein’s “A Ladder of Citizen Participation”(1969), there are eight levels of participation from to classify “Non-participation” to “Degrees of tokenism” and “Degrees of citizen power”. The full extend of local participation is citizen control, which guarantees locals have negotiation power and are in full charge of the project, policy, and managerial duty. In our case, the project only stay in the informing level. URA and developer use one-way informing method to tell locals who are directly affected by the demolition of Wan Chai market what is their rights and responsibilities. They don’t even conduct any real form consultation.
Refer to the video, stall owners protest because government agreed the relocation offer on behalf of stall owners name without asking their opinions and agreement. Besides, the URA and CEH provide no communication channel to locals, protests became their only way to reflect views.Therefore, locals were powerless decision takers in Wan Chai redevelopment plan.
Professionals: Architects, Historians
Power to affect decision
During the so call consultation period, Architects and Historians showed their concern towards the demolition of WanChai market. Their opinions always voice out through media like editorial, academic paper and news. For example, Tony Banham, an amateur historian specializing in Hong Kong's military history, conduced an interview with SCMP and said the market played a crucial role in the defense of Central thus It is inexcusable for the government to let the market be demolished(Lai, 2004). On the other hand, architects published various academic paper to explain why WanChai market’s Bauhaus style architecture design is so unique and its architecture significance that make the market worth to be maintained. “Wan Chai Market: Rediscovering Streamline Moderne Architecture” written by Prof. Lynne DiStefano (2004) is one of the examples.
Compare with ordinary normal locala, professional opinions are much easier to be accepted by developer. As a result, Chinese Estates Holdings modified the demolition plan in 2007 to built “One Wan Chai” on top of the WanChai market and preserve the facade of the historical building, yet not preserving the wet market culture.
NGOs: Antiquities Advisory Board, Wan Chai Heritage Taskforce
Watch dog, Middleman
As government and developer didn’t provide communication channel and real consultation to community, NGOs played an important role in the WanChai redevelopment project. Antiquities Advisory Board and Wan Chai Heritage Taskforce will be taken as example to demonstrate different levels of NGOs participation.
Antiquities Advisory Board
According to Antiquities Advisory Board’s page (2014), “The Board was set up to advise the Antiquities Authority on any matters relating to antiquities and monuments”.It supposed to serves as a bridge between the Board and the public, provides specific information about Hong Kong heritage and provides a channel for public to share their comments and suggestions towards heritage preservation.
But SCMP recorded Antiquities Advisory Board had not raised an objection to the developer’s plan (Lee, 2008). They claim that WanChai market is regarded as a grade- three listed building in 1990, which means it does not qualify for consideration as a declared monument although it has some architectural merit. Therefore they have no comments about demolishing Wan Chai Market.
Wan Chai Heritage Taskforce
According to a public letter from Wan Chai Heritage Taskforce (24 May, 2004), Wan Chai Heritage Taskforce was formed by Wan Chai District Council, the Hong Kong Institutes of Architects, the American Institutes of Architects, the Department of Architecture of the University of Hong Kong, Urban Watch and the Conservancy Association. They treasure the social and cultural value of Wan Chai, thus they produce various activities aiming to conserve heritage in Wan Chai.
The Force organized Wan Chai heritage Celebrities Tour (Lo, 2004). In the tour, officials and celebrities will be invited to show their support for the presentation of the city’s rich, old culture. Besides, it also held a meeting called “Conserving Wan Chai Market Design Charrette” on 30th July 2004. Then the opinions came from these meetings were sent to the government and the developer. Public forum and WanChai Photography and Writing Competition are two of those events held to gather public attention towards the WanChai market redevelopment project.
The Force were highly participated in conserving WanChai market by holding activities to raise public awareness and sending public letter to governmental department and developer to convey public views on the demolition of WanChai market.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Antiquities Advisory Board.(2014). About Us. Retrieved 30 November, 2014, from http://www.aab.gov.hk/en/index.php
Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of planners, 35(4), 216-224.
Urban Renewal Authority.(2014). Our Commitment. Retrieved 30 November, 2014, from http://ura.org.hk/en/about-ura/our-commitment.aspx
Chinese Estates Holdings Limited. (2014). Milestones. Retrieved from 30 November, 2014, from http://www.chineseestates.com/eng/page/group+profile/milestones/chinese+estates+holdings+limited.aspx
DiStefano, L.(2004). Wan Chai Market: Rediscovering Streamline Moderne Architecture. Retrieved from
Lai, C. (2004, May 22). Wan Chai Market 'a key war relic. South China Morning Post. Retrieved from http://www.scmp.com/article/456589/wan-chai-market-key-war-relic
Lee, C. (2008, April 21). Group opposes tower plan at market site. South China Morning Post. Retrieved from http://www.scmp.com/article/634587/group-opposes-tower-plan-market-site
Lo, E. (2004, July 10). Highlighting history to save Wan Chai from demolition. South China Morning Post. Retrieved from http://www.scmp.com/article/462594/highlighting-history-save-wan-chai-demolition
SCMP.(2004, April 21). A truer picture of redevelopment needed. South China Morning Post. Retrieved from http://www.scmp.com/article/452853/truer-picture-redevelopment-needed
Sin, W. S. (2009). Towards a sustainable community: an evaluation of the role of community participation in the redevelopment projects of Wan Chai and Kwun Tong (Doctoral dissertation, The University of Hong Kong (Pokfulam, Hong Kong)).
Wan Chai Heritage Taskforce.(2004, May 24).Save Wan Chai Market. Retrieved 2 December, 2014, from http://www.arch.cuhk.edu.hk/server1/resch2/livearch/projects/WanchaiMarket/letter.pdf
Wu, H.(2007, September 25). Wan Chai Market facade may stay. South China Morning Post. Retrieved from http://www.scmp.com/article/609175/wan-chai-market-facade-may-stay
