After deadly Tai Po fire, Hong Kong’s urban redevelopment body has no room for complacency

The deadly Wang Fuk Court fire has put a spotlight on the maintenance of ageing buildings in Hong Kong.

Whether in news reports, commentaries, or daily banters, nearly all discussions are either about the mandatory building renovation scheme, bid-rigging, or ways to stamp out bid-rigging. The Buildings Department has ordered all buildings undergoing major maintenance to remove their scaffolding nets. 

Since Wang Fuk Court is a development under the Housing Authority’s Home Ownership Scheme (HOS), the authority faces criticism for not taking up the management and maintenance of HOS estates, leaving them prey to bid-riggers. 

The Urban Renewal Authority is also under scrutiny. A media investigation found that it had failed in its gatekeeping role. The HK$330 million maintenance project was tendered through the URA’s Smart Tender service in May 2023.

The project’s consultant, Will Power Architects Company Ltd, submitted an assessment of the bidders to the URA four months later.

Prestige Construction & Engineering Company received the highest scores. The construction company’s repeated violations of Labour Department safety regulations and Buildings Department disciplinary actions were omitted from the assessment.

The URA failed to identify the misrepresentations in the assessment.

See also: Tai Po fire timeline: Wang Fuk Court’s HK$330 million renovation, ignored warnings and aftermath

The URA has since removed the two companies from its registration scheme. It promised to review the Smart Tender scheme and explore ways to ensure the accuracy of verifiable information during the bidding phase. 

Directors from the project’s consultancy firm and the contractor are among those under criminal investigation. No one has questioned whether the URA was colluding with the consultant or the contractor.

But was it a tragedy of complacency? It is inconceivable that the URA – a body staffed by building and construction professionals – failed to spot inaccuracies in the assessment report.

But no one can turn the clock back. Both “if” and “with hindsight” are empty words for a deadly fire that killed at least 160 people and displaced thousands of families.

Chief Executive John Lee has ordered an independent committee, chaired by a judge, to probe the blaze.

The committee’s investigation report will help reform the city’s building management and maintenance regime. Whether the future regime will demand a more active role for the two statutory bodies remains to be seen.

Whatever the recommendations, maintenance of ageing buildings will be back in the limelight. Whether HOS estates like Wang Fuk Court, high-rises in urban areas and new towns, or tenement blocks in old neighbourhoods, all will be closely watched. 

Since June, the URA has had a new managing director. Donald Choi, an architect by profession, was Chinachem Group’s CEO from 2018 to 2024. He was also the managing director of property developer Nan Fung Development and a director at architecture firm Foster + Partners.

Choi – the URA’s first leader from the private sector -has extensive experience in urban design, building, and construction.

He revitalised Central Market during his time at Chinachem. While at Nan Fung, he helped set up The Mills, a cultural hub, in Tsuen Wan. There are expectations that the URA will be transformed under his leadership.

The URA has not lacked unpopular projects since its formation in 2001.

To name a few: turning the Wedding Card Street into Lee Tung Avenue, the redevelopment of Kwun Tong town centre, the ongoing Flower Market Road, and the Kowloon City redevelopments.

Many, including myself, care about the livelihoods of small businesses in old communities, the social capital built over years or generations by those living in the areas, and the tangible and intangible cultural heritage embedded in the physical structures. We have been deeply sceptical and highly critical of the URA’s rationale and business model.

In every redevelopment project, the URA uproots families and businesses. Therefore, maintenance of old buildings is preferred over wholesale redevelopment.

I’m not going to challenge the URA’s rationale and business model in this opinion piece.

In the wake of the deadly blaze in Tai Po, it is more important for the URA, under Choi’s leadership, to be a diligent gatekeeper in building maintenance, a community builder for the well-being of those living in old districts, and a good urban designer for ongoing redevelopment projects. 

For the vacated Western Market, can the URA revitalise this historical building to its former glory, making it a landmark of Sheung Wan again, and a place to which everyone has access, and of which they can be proud?

The Kowloon City redevelopment will tear down a vibrant local economy built by generations of Chiu Chow and Thai residents in the area. Can the URA provide suitable shop space nearby for the dozens of family-run Chiu Chow grocery stores?

Those who want to continue running their businesses can indeed do so. However, these businesses will have to give up their signboards and many other culturally important wall decorations to fit into the new shop spaces. These items are cultural heritage that form part of their identity.   

For those affected by the redevelopments, can the URA not only pay compensation but also provide support after they move out of the original neighbourhood?

The URA has moral obligations to help these families and businesses settle into their new communities.  

Whether running Smart Tender or handling matters arising from a redevelopment project, there is no room for complacency.