Hong Kong Update: Citywalk Mall, Tsuen Wan

Another photo thread showing photos from my recent trip to Hong Kong

During my short (one week) trip in Hong Kong, one recent project I encountered that really caught my eye was Citywalk. Citywalk is a new podium mall (opened last March) below a residential development located in Tsuen Wan district of the New Territories, across the street from the supertall Nina Tower (I posted a photo thread of that project earlier).

Some aspects of the development aren't really worth writing home about. The project was developed by Sino Land in cooperation with the Urban Renewal Authority (URA), the government corporation that does exactly what its name says - take old tenement-lined streets and neighbourhoods in Hong Kong, then raze and remodel them into new mixed-use developments (often in an attempt at creating instant tourist attractions). I'm not a fan of URA's projects nor its mandate, but I have to admit that I really like this Citywalk.

Above the mall is Vision City, a high-rise residential complex comprising of five closely-spaced towers about 50 storeys in height. They are recent incarnations of Hong Kong's notorious "screen towers" - residential towers that are spaced so close to each other that they form a virtual wall, blocking neighbouring residents' views, and preventing sunlight and cool sea breezes from entering older neighbourhoods located inland from these towers. While Hong Kong people don't really mind their appearance, these towers would never pass any kind of North American urban design panel.

So what's so good about Citywalk? (designed by Jerde Partnership, designer of another famous HK shopping mall, Langham Place)

- It meets the street well, relative to other recent Hong Kong developments. It has street level retail that actually faces the street. At street level there is a minibus terminal. Unlike other Hong Kong mixed-use developments that whisk pedestrians from street level up to a fully-enclosed, air-conditioned mall, here the entrances to the mall are well-defined at street level, leading into a "piazza".

- The "piazza" is the main feature of the mall. The 3-storey mall is built around a well-landscaped public square with nice water features, surrounded by shops and restaurants. It is easily accessible from the street and acts as an extension of street retail.

- Directly above the mall (in North America, that would be the 4th floor) is the parking garage for the mall. In order to hide the garage from any view from the piazza, a "vertical garden" (aka a "living wall") is planted on the parking garage facade facing the piazza.

Conclusions: I don't really like the developer. I hate the residential towers in this development, but I'd love to see a condo podium like this in Toronto!

http://www.citywalk.com.hk/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CityWalk,_Hong_Kong

The vertical garden is an amzing idea for hiding the garage. I can see this whole complex work in Toronto. (Minus the screen towers)

I love the green walls, but that's about it for me. Oh the wooden plank walkway is nice too.

Why do you disagreew with this Urban Renewal Authority. They have the right idea! To make residential boring tenments into mixed-use meeting places. Isn't this what the Toronto Tower Renewal project is aiming to accomplish?

^ No, the mandate of URA is different from Toronto's Tower Renewal project. The URA does not deal with "commie blocks" like the Toronto project, but with tenement buildings constructed immediately after WWII in Hong Kong.

The problem with the URA is that most of its major projects are not going into "boring" neighbourhoods, but tenement neighbourhoods that are already mixed-use, vibrant and has strong bonds between residents and businesses. Instead of restoring the old tenement buildings (which the URA also does), in these big projects the URA is bent on removing existing businesses and residents, with little guarantees that they will be allowed to return to the neighbourhood when the project is complete. In some projects the URA just tries to remodel a street into a tourist attraction.

The problem with the URA is that it is somewhat Robert Moses-like in practice, ripping apart healthy neighbourhoods and streets in order to achieve its goal of developing tourist attractions and presenting a more "world class" look for the city. Sure, many recent developments by the URA are considered successful, but the costs of destroying neighbourhoods in the process may be too high.

Here in North America this was done in the 1950s and 1960s, but after Jane Jacobs this is now frowned upon. In Asia, cities have not yet come to realize the importance of heritage preservation or the benefits of old neighbourhoods. Fortunately more people in Hong Kong are now standing up for heritage preservation and taking action. Interestingly, the number one Hong Kong Canto-pop song from last year was a song about a URA project (even though the lyrics were for the demolition).

Good pics, I look forward to visit the project when I head there in May. You're right though, typically street level is completely ignored, but this project definitely is successful in being sensitive to all levels.

I was impressed with Tung Chung, at the end of the subway line, on Lantau Island when I was there, and thought it would make a fine model for GO to follow around it's stations. The architecture was horrid (I'm not impressed with much in HK) but the planning struck me as quite solid and the open square beside the station was quite well used, and surrounded by retail. I could imagine getting off the train and lingering there, perhaps eating at the Food Republic, before going home.

^ I know what you are talking about. I was impressed too...







I'm not a fan of Food Republic (the chain of shopping mall food courts in Hong Kong). The food court near where I stayed (Hollywood Plaza in Diamond Hill) was recently converted into a Food Republic. Before Food Republic, the food court was full of independent fast food shops selling cheap but good food, and it was packed all the time. Now with Food Republic, the prices are up, the number of food choices have gone down, the crowds are gone, all the food court staff wear uniforms, and the decor is very strange (some sort of school theme... the teriyaki restaurant inside was built to look like a library).

Archivist said:

I was impressed with Tung Chung, at the end of the subway line, on Lantau Island when I was there, and thought it would make a fine model for GO to follow around it's stations. The architecture was horrid (I'm not impressed with much in HK) but the planning struck me as quite solid and the open square beside the station was quite well used, and surrounded by retail. I could imagine getting off the train and lingering there, perhaps eating at the Food Republic, before going home.

Click to expand...

Actually, both Tung Chung and Tin Shui Wai (another newish, faraway and isolated new town, ie developed during the past 10-20 years) are frequently cited as the worst planned new towns in HK. A big problem with them is that there is a general lack of amenities, services and employment opportunities. Such a deficit is compounded by the fact that the population in these towns is predominantly in the lower income or new immigrant demographics (less severe for Tung Chung than for Tin Shui Wai, but still a big problem), due to the high concentration of public housing estates in these two towns compared to other new towns. Both of these towns, with a pop of ~100k and ~300k respectively, have barely any sports or community facilities (1 and 2 small community libraries, respectively; 1 sports field each; no pools or other major sports facility in TC and only 1 opened in TSW a year and half ago), no hospitals, and minimal entertainment venues (one cinema each, and only one major shopping centre, though each public housing estate does have their own mediocre "community-mall" that could satisfy daily needs). There are also no major employment centres, esp TSW; granted that TC is close to the airport, and some of the pilots, flight attendents and engineers do live in the private condos in TC, but for the majority of less specialized or less well-paid labourers, how many technicians or janitors or foodcourt salespeople can the airport possibly employ, even if they don't take in anyone from elsewhere in HK? So the only way is for those people to commute to the urban core, which takes about 30-60 min one way and costs $15-20 HKD (~$2.5-3 CAD, which is quite pricey for transit fare in HK) --- not a big problem for a Torontonian suburbanite perhaps, and maybe not for a HK middle class person either, but it's the lower-income bracket that is especially hard hit here.

So I guess Tung Chung could be a good model for a TOD for GO, which will perhaps live no more than 5k people and most of them middle-class, but in reality Tung Chung is certainly not a well planned town.