City as a process is a concept worthwhile reflection. On the one hand, this is a more successful case than the same system implemented in other cities. On the other, it also means that Hong Kong lacks significant historic conservation agenda. The idea of an elevated pedestrian network connecting the Central and Admiralty districts in 1961 shaped Hong Kong as we know it today, defining Hong Kong as a dense and complex place. In my opinion, these kinds of complex interconnections are the things that Hong Kong need to conserve as they represent Hong Kong at its core. We see similar connections in many places like Dallas and Mumbai, but not nearly as symbolic as those in Hong Kong. Also, we can see that downtown Minneapolis and Multi-level Montreal possess different ways of city connections, but uniquely, Hong Kong combined those two in its own style. Furthermore, without these complex interconnections within the new artificial topography of the autonomous urban form, Hong Kong would certainly not be the famous and modern metropolis it is today.
Leung Kwan Ho Gordon, 3035778022
There are some interesting points in your response but also a lot of generalisations that need to be further elaborated. It would be great to delve deeper into the complexity and symbolism behind the elevated pedestrian network of Hong Kong with reference to the text. What makes Hong Kong different from Dallas, Montreal, and Mumbai which you inserted? What is the “new artificial topography of the autonomous urban form”? Perhaps you can find clues from Yoos and James’ description of the respective multi-level systems – “Montreal was the first case of a comprehensive below-grade pedestrian system implemented at an urban scale” (Yoos and James 2016, 7); “Ponte’s vision for the Dallas Pedestrian Network encompassed the entire downtown […] comprised one mile of overhead walkways and two miles of underground tunnel links, connecting a total of 36 blocks […] The combination of above- and below-grade connections amplified its discontinuities.” (Yoos and James 2016, 7-8); Hong Kong has “the most extensive multilevel pedestrian system in the world […] evolved organically from a need to reconcile the city’s complex street pattern with the steep hillside terrain.[…] Hong Kong employs “on-demand planning” to develop and refine the system and response to changing circumstances” (Yoos and James 2016, 11). You may wish to compare the three cites cited and also your views on Mumbai and Hong Kong in terms of its planning, geography, urban form etc.