MUMBAI: Five days remain for feedback on Mumbai’s new “iconic buildings” policy before the BMC proceeds to put the idea into action. An idea that was sown around three years ago—which HT first reported about on October 1, 2022—it aims to encourage structures of “architectural excellence” in the city, offering extra FSI as the carrot.
Respecting its intent, the policy has nonetheless raised the eyebrows of a few eminent urban planners, architects and cultural doyens of the city. What if the attempt to draw interesting buildings on Mumbai’s skyline distorts its already present iconic structures and neighbourhoods, they ask.
“Mumbai urgently requires a skyline review process—a body that evaluates how proposed structures affect sightlines, scale and heritage precincts,” wrote Shireen Gandhy, director of the city’s first gallery, Chemould, in a letter to the BMC, and then turned it into a change.org petition that racked up over 1,000 signatures in a day. “Without this, the “iconic” label may become a licence for vertical excess, even in sensitive areas such as Marine Drive and Fort, where visual harmony is integral to identity.”
Heritage architect Vikas Dilawari pointed out that the buildings that are considered icons today, such as the CSMT station or Rajabai Tower, had some cohesiveness with the overall planning and design of the neighbourhood. “If the policy is just going to encourage iconic buildings without regard to the surroundings, everything will stick out like a sore thumb, adding to the Disneyland feeling of it all,” he said.
{{/usCountry}}Heritage architect Vikas Dilawari pointed out that the buildings that are considered icons today, such as the CSMT station or Rajabai Tower, had some cohesiveness with the overall planning and design of the neighbourhood. “If the policy is just going to encourage iconic buildings without regard to the surroundings, everything will stick out like a sore thumb, adding to the Disneyland feeling of it all,” he said.
{{/usCountry}}Abha Narain Lambah, a conservation architect, had similar concerns. “While there are many areas in Mumbai, like the suburbs, which could use a dose of iconic buildings, I would urge the government to be very careful about approving any structure in historic precincts that might overpower the icons that already stand. The many historic precincts of Marine Drive, Khotachiwadi, Banganga, Gamdevi etc already have an intrinsic value arising from their historic footprint and do not need disturbing.”
The policy is ambiguous on what counts as ‘iconic’, describing it as any building or space that has a unique or distinctive characteristic. The judge of this will be a BMC commissioner-led committee of six members, consisting of one renowned name each in architecture, visual arts and business, the chief engineer of the Development Plan department and the director of town planning. The commissioner can, if he wishes to, appoint two more experts in architecture and urban planning.
Finding this unsatisfactory, Gandhy wrote in her letter, “The governance framework of the policy is deeply inadequate. Unlike Mumbai’s Heritage Committee, which includes civil society experts, architects and historians, the Scrutiny Committee under Regulation 33(27) lacks defined membership criteria, transparency mechanisms or a process of public accountability. Decisions about what constitutes “iconic” cannot be made behind closed doors. Further, there is no provision for an appeals mechanism or a safeguard against conflicts of interest. For a policy with citywide implications, this opacity is untenable.”
Members of the public, particularly those in the field of architecture, should be included in the decisions that will impact their surroundings, agreed Dilawari, adding that the additional doling out of FSI—up to 50% on a premium, as well as potential for unlimited FSI on ‘uninhabitable’ spaces should be justified and be transparent. He also emphasised that the iconic buildings concept should be used for public buildings. “They would equally benefit from good design,” he said.
Under the policy, to be rolled out under a special provision the Regulation 33(27) of the Development Control and Promotion Regulations (DCPR) 2034, five ‘iconic’ buildings can be approved each year. These structures cannot be entirely residential, and at least 40% of their space needs to be open to the public for free or for a fee.
July 24, is the last date for citizens to send in their suggestions and objections on the policy to the BMC’s Development Plan department.
Stay updated with all the Breaking News and Latest News from Mumbai. Click here for comprehensive coverage of top Cities including Bengaluru, Delhi, Hyderabad, and more across India along with Stay informed on the latest happenings in World News.
Stay updated with all the Breaking News and Latest News from Mumbai. Click here for comprehensive coverage of top Cities including Bengaluru, Delhi, Hyderabad, and more across India along with Stay informed on the latest happenings in World News.