I was interested in Yoos and James’ interpretation of and “urbanism” of HK by its growing population. As they explained pedestrian systems as “thickening”, I immediately thought up of “elevations”. I think HK has preserved the old, yet developed cities, reacting to the vastly growing population in the most efficient way. The most well-known reaction for this could be the escalators, footbridges, stairs in the middle of the roads: “on-demand planning”. Sometimes, as a foreigner, I would think, why would they have so many footbridges and escalators in HK? But now to think of it, that means HK has such a sophisticated pedestrian system that they have thickened, elevated, interiorized walkways that we, as pedestrians, can technically walk anywhere on foot. As a foreigner, that absolutely blows my mind. It’s making tight interactions within people, making pedestrians most comfortable, but not restricting nor hindering the traffic (both cars and humans).
— Hyunjoo KIM, 3035821427
Your point on thickening is particularly interesting as our conventional understanding of thickening is usually on plan rather than elevations. You may wish to explain why the thickening happens in elevation, the text has offered some clues – “the most extensive multilevel pedestrian system[…] has evolved organically from a need to reconcile the city’s complex street pattern with the steep hillside terrain” – the geography of Hong Kong is perhaps a good starting point. It would be great if you reference the text a bit more to strengthen your points.